All News (Page 14)

The deputy security coordinator of the community of Na’aran was detained for questioning after he was filmed last Thursday pointing his weapon at Israeli settlers in the Jericho area of the West Bank, one day after Jewish families moved into homes at the site.

Following the incident, an investigation was opened at the Jordan Valley police station in the Judea and Samaria District on suspicion of unlawful use of a weapon. The suspect was questioned and released under restrictive conditions.

Walla reported that police received two separate reports following the incident. According to the first report, the deputy security coordinator pointed his weapon at settlers and security forces who were in the area.

The second report alleged that shots had also been fired at the scene. Police are examining the circumstances of the incident, and at this stage, it has not yet been determined whether shots were actually fired or what led the suspect to point his weapon.

Jewish families with Nahala settler movement buy eight homes near Jericho

The incident occurred one day after the Nahala movement announced that Jewish families had moved into eight homes in the Jericho area, in an operation it led with the backing and assistance of the Binyamin Regional Council.

According to the movement, the homes were purchased at full price as part of a covert operation that was revealed when the families moved in on Wednesday.

One of the central questions in the investigation concerns the circumstances of the deputy security coordinator’s arrival at the scene. Sources close to him told Walla that he did not come to the area on his own initiative but was called in after a report of a disturbance.

“He was dispatched with the rapid response team to Jericho following a report of rioters,” they said.

However, the IDF clarified that the suspect was not operating at the scene on behalf of the military. He is a civilian serving in a security role in another community and had no authority or security responsibility in the area where the incident occurred.

An IDF source clarified in a conversation with Walla that “the security coordinator was not acting in the course of his duties,” while an official response from the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit stated: “The suspect did not arrive in the area on behalf of the IDF.”

Police confirmed to Walla that following the reports, the suspect was detained for questioning at the Jordan Valley police station and was subsequently released under restrictive conditions.

The investigation is ongoing and includes examining the circumstances in which the weapon was pointed and the additional report received regarding shots being fired at the scene.

This post was originally published on here. 

In January 2026, two rival groups of German anti-fascists prepared to face each other on the streets of Leipzig. Both claimed to be fighting fascism. One planned to “liberate” the Connewitz district from “Antideutsche”, while the other intended to protect pro-Israel organizations from their political opponents. Calls for mobilization spread on social media, preparatory meetings were scheduled, and joint trips from neighboring cities were organized.

“No peace with antisemites!” declared the group AG Antifa Halle. In a statement published on January 10, the activists specified the exact departure time of the train from Halle: 10:52 a.m., line S5. The meeting place was the Zoo station. Four days before the demonstration, they planned to discuss the route and upcoming actions at the local left-wing centre VL.

On the other side, a march was being organized under the slogan “Antifa means Free Palestine”. Among those mobilizing was the group Handala Leipzig, which the State Office for the Protection of the Constitution Saxony (Verfassungsschutz) classifies as part of an extremist milieu. Posts by supporters of the march called for ridding Connewitz of “ultra-Germans” – the term opponents used to describe the local pro-Israel left-wing scene.

On January 17, about 1,400 people took part in the pro-Palestinian demonstration. Between 1,600 and 2,000 people attended the protest in solidarity with Israel. Over 1,400 police officers were deployed to maintain order.

The “Antideutsche”, literally “anti-Germans”, emerged within Germany’s radical left-wing movement more than thirty years ago. They oppose German nationalism, criticize antisemitism among the left, and consider the defense of Israel a necessary part of anti-fascist politics. They use images of a Merkava tank alongside a threat directed at antisemites on their stickers; other merchandise features the Iron Dome missile defense system or the Mossad emblem.

Following the Hamas attack on October 7, this position became a source of particularly fierce conflict. People who once might have marched together in demonstrations against neo-Nazis are now taking part in opposing rallies, accusing one another of betraying leftist principles, and arguing over who actually has the right to call themselves an anti-fascist.

In 1990, as Germany prepared for reunification, some on the radical left marched under the slogan “Nie Wieder Deutschland!” – “Never again Germany!”

For most Germans, reunification signaled the end of the country’s postwar division. For opponents of the new nation-state, it raised fears of a resurgence of German nationalism and the strengthening of a country responsible for the Holocaust.

At one of the most famous demonstrations against German reunification, held on May 12, 1990, in Frankfurt am Main, left-wing and Green politicians marched in the front ranks. Among them was Claudia Roth, known in Israel for the Documenta 15 conflict.

On November 6, 2026, a new scandal erupted involving Claudia Roth following an interview on the Jung & Naiv podcast. The former culture minister called her previous criticism of the directors of the film No Other Land – who had made accusations against Israel at the 2024 Berlinale – a mistake. Explaining her previous position, Roth mentioned “incredible pressure” from the Central Council of Jews in Germany and recounted the words of friends abroad who had asked when she would be freed from the “guilt of history.”

But Israel did not immediately become a central theme for the Antideutsche. In 1991, during the Gulf War, Iraq fired missiles at Israel. The German left protested against the military operation by the US and its allies. The future Antideutsche criticized the anti-war movement for the fact that the threat to the Israeli population was barely on its agenda.

Anti-imperialists viewed Israel primarily as an ally of the US. The Antideutsche argued that this position ignored the history of antisemitism and the reasons for the creation of a state in which Jews could ensure their own security.

In the years that followed, the disagreements only intensified. During the 2003 Iraq War, some Antideutsche groups supported the US intervention. Israeli and American flags at radical left-wing events became a source of open conflict.

However, by no means did all Antideutsche share this position. Among them were opponents of capitalism and American foreign policy, supporters of Western democracies, and groups focused almost exclusively on combating antisemitism.

‘Pro-Zionist, anti-fascist’ group includes communists

One member of the pro-Israel anti-fascist scene spoke to The Jerusalem Post about his experience on the condition of anonymity. Z. lives in northern Germany and was in Leipzig on January 17.

Z. prefers to call his group “pro-Zionist anti-fascists”. His own political awakening took place in the early 2000s. “There are communists among us,” he says, but clarifies that the leftists close to him are guided by Marx and Adorno, not by Stalin or Lenin. He attributes this stance to a rejection of authoritarian regimes.

Z. joined left-wing circles as a teenager. He participated in anti-fascist protests, was involved in animal rights activism, and was part of the squatter scene. He has Jewish roots, and his comrade from his early days of activism was Jewish. They encountered antisemitic remarks even among their political allies. Later, he became acquainted with the German pro-Israel anti-fascist scene.

He describes the term “Antideutsche” itself as a polemical nickname originally given by the movement’s pro-Palestinian opponents: “We simply adopted that name.”

Over the course of three decades, the movement has not established a central leadership or party structure. “There is no central body,” Z. confirms. According to him, activists can be found in autonomous groups as well as among supporters of various political parties.

He recalls that over the years, some groups supported the George W. Bush administration in the US, while others focused on feminism. “The one thing we all agree on is that Israel has a right to exist,” he says, articulating their common ground.

When discussing his own left-wing views, Z. returns to the kibbutzim: he calls them a rare example of a socialist project that actually worked. This is precisely why the Hamas attack on border communities on October 7 is particularly painful for him: the people attacked were those who had dedicated their lives to left-wing ideals and cooperation with Palestinians.

On October 18, 2023, Conne Island, a left-wing cultural center in Connewitz, published a statement regarding Hamas’s attack on Israel.

The authors expressed solidarity with the victims, the families of those killed and kidnapped, and Jews in the diaspora. They condemned Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah, specifically mentioning the attack on the Nova music festival. The statement also addressed the violence perpetrated by Islamist organizations against women and the LGBTQ community. The authors expressed support for Palestinians opposing Hamas rule.

“Never Again” means “never again defenseless,” they declared. The text called for ensuring the safety of Jewish lives and recognizing Israel’s right to self-defense.

October 7 spurs solidarity rallies, pro-Palestinian mobilization

For Z., the morning of October 7 began early. He recalls seeing the first reports. Some of his friends were at the Nova festival. “One of them was kidnapped,” he says, without giving a name.

Solidarity rallies with Israel took place in German cities. Anti-German groups participated in some of these initiatives and held their own demonstrations against antisemitism. Werder Bremen ultras, whose fan scene has longstanding ties with fans of Hapoel Jerusalem and Maccabi Haifa, displayed banners for Israeli hostages after October 7, including Hersh Goldberg-Polin, a Werder fan abducted at the Nova festival and murdered in Gaza.

At the same time, pro-Palestinian mobilization was growing. On university campuses, in cultural circles, and within left-wing organizations, debates intensified over the war, Israel’s responsibility, and acceptable forms of protest. Critics accuse the “Antideutsche” of ignoring the plight of the Palestinians and of labeling criticism of Israeli state policy as antisemitism.

Z. regrets how much of his circle’s resources are being drained by the conflict with other anti-fascists. According to him, against the backdrop of the rise of right-wing forces in Germany, the pro-Israel left has to spend “so much money and energy” on internal disputes within other leftists. He accuses certain groups of participating in demonstrations alongside Hamas sympathizers and people he associates with the “Muslim Brotherhood” and the Turkish ultra-nationalist “Grey Wolves.”

On April 30, 2024, a pro-Palestinian demonstration organized by the Solinetz group took place in Halle. Pro-Israel activists from the autonomous left-wing groups showed up at the scene. They carried signs reading “Antifa heißt Solidarität mit Israel” (“Antifascism means solidarity with Israel”) and “Defund UNRWA,” demanding an end to funding for the UN agency that provides aid to Palestinian refugees.

They had come to confront another left-wing group. According to the state’s Verfassungsschutz, they were outnumbered. Counter-protests have become a visible part of the movement’s activity since October 7. Its rhetoric, too, has drawn criticism.

Documents from the State Office for the Protection of the Constitution Saxony-Anhalt mentioned an incident in which Palestinians were collectively referred to as a “Tätervolk” – “a nation of perpetrators” – at a pro-Israel event. And while this statement cannot be attributed to the entire movement, it clearly illustrates the extremes to which individual members of this community can go in a political confrontation.

The dispute also extends to Israel’s own left. Israeli activist Michael Sappir, one of the founders of Jüdisch-israelischer Dissens Leipzig, criticized the relationship between the German pro-Israel community and Israeli progressive movements in an interview with Platypus Review in 2024.

Sappir advocates for Palestinian rights and believes that some German activists do not take sufficient account of the political positions of the Israeli left.

Z. is willing to debate with Israeli leftists who do not share his views. He does not believe that Israeli origin automatically makes someone’s political position correct. “Israelis can also make antisemitic statements,” he says.

Antideutsche groups distinguish between support of Israel, support for government

Some Antideutsche groups emphasize the need to distinguish between Israel’s right to exist and support for specific government decisions. Z. himself makes no secret of his disagreement with the Israeli prime minister. “It’s time for Netanyahu to retire,” he says. He would not vote for him and would like to see a politician with more left-wing views at the helm of Israel. On the issue of a two-state solution, he adds, there is no unified position within pro-Israel circles.

Some Antideutsche groups appear in reports of the Verfassungsschutz. Support for Israel does not exempt groups from scrutiny over alleged extremist activity. Surveillance concerns particular organizations, not the movement as a whole.

In January 2026, the Saxon Office for the Protection of the Constitution described the upcoming demonstrations in Leipzig as a conflict within the radical left-wing milieu. Its director, Dirk-Martin Christian, said the Middle East conflict is widening the rift between political groups.

In January 2026, Antideutsche communists, Jewish organizations, feminist groups, and other pro-Israel initiatives took part in counter-demonstrations in Leipzig. The participation of Jewish organizations does not mean that all German Jews support the Antideutsche. Nor does it mean that criticism of the movement is necessarily linked to a denial of Israel’s right to exist.

The activists themselves continue to debate where the line is drawn between antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli government, what political alliances are permissible, and how far solidarity with Israel should go.

For Z., the line is drawn where Israel is denied the right to exist. In his view, it is both possible and necessary to criticize Israeli politicians by the same standards as politicians from other countries: “There should be no double standards.”

This post was originally published on here. 

The Sudanese army detained Ahmed Haroun, an Islamist leader and the chairman of Sudan’s former ruling party, National Congress Party, two officials in the party told Reuters on Sunday.

Haroun is wanted by the International Criminal Court.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

Yisrael Beytenu chairman MK Avigdor Liberman on Sunday defended his willingness to compromise with haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties over military conscription, insisting that reaching political agreements does not mean abandoning his principles.

Liberman’s remarks came after his announcement on Friday that he was prepared to show flexibility on the haredi draft law, a significant shift from his staunch opposition to entering a government with the haredi parties Shas and United Torah Judaism.

מוכנות לפשרה לא אומרת ויתור על ערכים ועקרונות. אני רואה בימים האחרונים את מצעד האיוולת של שורה של פרשנים, עיתונאים מטעם, בוטים ואנשים בעלי דעות קדומות, לעיתים עם נימה גזענית בולטת. לא משנה מה אני אומר, מה אני עושה ומהי האמת, הם תמיד עסוקים בייחוס מניעים זדוניים ובהמצאת קונספירציות. מי שתוקף אותי על הניסיונות להגיע להבנות עם המפלגות החרדיות, נמנה עם אותם אנשים שמעדיפים להקים ממשלה הנשענת על רע”ם והרשימה המשותפת. מפלגות שחלק מהח”כים שלהם מזדהים באופן פומבי עם חמאס, מגדירים אותו ארגון צדקה ומאשימים את מדינת ישראל ברצח עם ובפשעים נגד האנושות. אני רוצה להבהיר באופן חד-משמעי: זה לא יקרה. לא אתן יד להקמת ממשלה כזאת, שלתפיסתי תפגע בביטחון ותחזיר את נתניהו לשלטון. במציאות שנוצרה, על מנת למנוע בחירות נוספות ולשים קץ לעידן נתניהו, אין מנוס מקבלת החלטות קשות ומהכרעה בסוגיות שבהן ניתן לגלות גמישות ולהגיע להבנות. הבנה אינה ויתור על עקרונות, והידברות אינה מחיקה של קווים אדומים. אני עדיין סבור שהמודל הנכון הוא חוק גיוס לכולם. יחד עם זאת, לנוכח תוצאות הבחירות, עלינו לבחון אפשרויות להגיע להסכמות, גם על בסיס מתווים שגובשו בעבר. בשנת 2018 הבאתי הצעת חוק גיוס שנוסחה על ידי צה”ל ומערכת הביטחון. בהמשך פורסם דו”ח שקדי, והקואליציה הנוכחית גיבשה הצעת חוק משלה. ברור לי שלאחר אירועי 7 באוקטובר גם החוק שהצעתי בשנת 2018 מחייב שינויים והתאמות, אך הוא עדיין מהווה בסיס ראוי לגיבוש הסכמות. לא ויתרתי על עקרון הגיוס, ולא על המחויבות להרחבת ההטבות ולשיפור מעמדם של משרתי המילואים ואנשי הקבע. אני מזכיר כי בתקופת כהונתי כשר האוצר העליתי את שכר החיילים בסדיר ב-50%, ובהמשך הכנסתי את תוכנית “ממדים ללימודים” לתקציב המדינה. אני לא פועל מתוך אמביציה אישית להיות ראש ממשלה בכל מחיר. הדגשתי תמיד שמבחינתי זו אופציה ולא אובססיה. מאז 2019 ועד היום אני מקבל אין ספור הצעות מפתות מהצד השני. אני לא עסוק בתרגילים פוליטיים ולא מנסה להכשיל אף אחד. אני פועל ואמשיך לפעול מתוך מחויבות אחת בלבד: טובת מדינת ישראל ועם ישראל. זה מה שהנחה אותי לאורך כל הדרך, ורק זה יעמוד לנגד עיניי בכל החלטה שאקבל.

— אביגדור ליברמן (@AvigdorLiberman) November 8, 2026

“Being willing to compromise does not mean giving up values and principles,” Liberman said.

The Yisrael Beytenu leader accused commentators, journalists, bots, and political critics of misrepresenting his intentions, claiming that some of the criticism carried racist undertones.

“In recent days, I have been watching a parade of folly by a series of commentators, partisan journalists, bots, and people with prejudices, sometimes with a distinctly racist tone,” he said.

“No matter what I say, what I do, or what the truth is, they are always busy attributing malicious motives and inventing conspiracies.”

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

Iranian-linked vessels have been observed making suspicious movements near undersea telecommunications cables in the Gulf of Oman, according to a Financial Times report, following Tehran’s warnings that it could target regional communications infrastructure if the United States and Israel renew military strikes against Iran. 

Israeli maritime intelligence company Windward tracked at least four ships traveling along unusual routes near submarine cable networks, including three oil tankers under US sanctions and a small Iranian fishing vessel. 

Tracking records showed that the fishing boat lingered near the Europe India Gateway and Transworld cables between October 21 and 26. Windward identified similar irregular navigation patterns involving the three tankers. 

According to the company, the ships behaved differently from commercial vessels stationed nearby awaiting oil cargoes from the Gulf. Their movements changed after they approached specific corridors containing telecommunications cables. 

Windward told the Financial Times that the vessels traveled “normally until they reached a specific cable corridor, and only then slowed, looped, turned back, loitered, or went dark.” 

The company assessed that the behavior “fits the profile of mapping the cable routes, or placing charges or mines on them while dark.” 

Iran threatens internet connection of Persian Gulf countries

The findings come after Iran repeatedly threatened over the past month to attack submarine cables and data centers in the Strait of Hormuz if Washington and Israel launch another military offensive. The warnings coincided with indications from the US president that military operations against Tehran could resume. 

Telecommunications infrastructure beneath the Strait of Hormuz provides essential internet connections to several countries in the Persian Gulf. Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar depend entirely on cables passing through the waterway for their connectivity. 

Telecommunications research firm TeleGeography identifies six existing cables running through the strait, alongside three additional networks currently under construction. 

Those projects include Fibre in Gulf, Sea-Me-We 6, and 2Africa, with the latter closest to completion. 

An attack damaging the cables could severely disrupt internet services and economic activity across neighboring Gulf states, particularly countries without alternative submarine routes for international connectivity. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Bat Yam Mayor Tzvika Brot and his team on Monday “ambushed” and pursued an Iranian diplomat through Manhattan while reading him a NIS 250 m. lawsuit over damages caused to the municipality by Iranian missiles, the Bat Yam municipality shared.

The municipality reported that the ambush, dubbed “operation open account,” was two months in the making, with multiple people traveling to New York to locate an official Iranian representative to serve their lawsuit.

“They sent us missiles, and we sent them a bill,” Brot told Walla.

Israelis could not enter the Iranian diplomatic compound, so the Bat Yam team prepared identification sketches of senior Iranian representatives at the United Nations and selected a meeting point, according to the statement.

“The team assembled for the mission did not rely on a chance encounter with an Iranian diplomat,” the municipality said.

According to people who organized the ambush, surveillance personnel spotted an Iranian representative leaving the Iranian compound heading for the UN headquarters and alerted Brot and his team. 

The lawsuit against Iran was filed last Sunday with the Jerusalem District Court, with the operation following the next day.

The Iranian representative reportedly ignored Brot and his associates and tried to walk away, prompting the team to chase him through the streets of Manhattan until Brot had completely read the contents of the lawsuit, thereby advancing legal proceedings.

Holding Iran accountable for deadly strikes

“The campaign against Iran does not end on the battlefield. It also extends to the courts, bank accounts, assets, and every financial resource of the Iranian regime. We will continue fighting on behalf of terror victims until we bring the ayatollahs’ regime to its knees financially,” Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner said in the statement.

Nine residents were killed, and 178 were wounded in Bat Yam in June 2025 after an Iranian missile barrage on central Israel. Approximately 160 buildings were damaged, with 22 requiring immediate demolition, leaving thousands of residents homeless, the municipality reported.

Brot allegedly decided “that very night to demand that Iran pay for the damage.”

The Bat Yam municipality said Iran has 60 days to respond to the lawsuit; however, if no defense is submitted, then the municipality will be entitled to request a default judgment.

If Bat Yam wins the lawsuit, it is still unclear how the municipality could collect the hundreds of millions of shekels in restitution from Iran, which is an enemy state of Israel.

This post was originally published on here. 

The IDF has been calling up combat soldiers who were discharged from mandatory service only months ago, alongside reservists struggling with severe burnout and family difficulties, as the military grapples with a growing manpower shortage, Walla learned on Sunday.

Despite mounting concerns over the strain on reserve soldiers, the IDF continues to issue call-up orders. Meanwhile, the General Staff is debating whether to publicly address the issue.

“They won the two wars on our backs, the reservists. Seven fronts, and the eighth front: elections,” one reservist told Walla.

Senior IDF officials are currently weighing whether to publicly and forcefully raise urgent issues surrounding the severe manpower crisis, foremost among them a shortage of approximately 15,000 soldiers.

The military is also contending with the departure of highly skilled personnel, including engineers, programmers, and specialists with critical institutional knowledge who are receiving attractive offers in the civilian job market.

Reservists voice their criticism

The shortage is also being felt in logistics, leading to a new practice of granting veteran noncommissioned officers representational ranks.

On the ground, criticism is far sharper. Reservists have strongly criticized IDF policy and warned that the burden on those serving continues to grow.

“The pressure and burden on a minority of Israeli society have not decreased after three years of fighting. They have increased, and so has the burnout. The IDF circumvents all criticism through emergency call-up orders. Reservists have no choice but to report for duty,” a senior reserve officer told Walla.

According to commanders in the reserve brigades, reserve battalion and company commanders find themselves on the front lines every day, forced to make difficult decisions.

“They are dealing with self-employed reservists who are collapsing financially, people holding specialized positions in the economy, students, and combat soldiers who were discharged from mandatory service only a few months ago and are already being required to put on their uniforms again. Added to all of these are exhausted reservists dealing with complex family and relationship problems without an adequate support system,” a soldier told Walla.

The dilemma facing the IDF’s senior command comes amid renewed political turmoil surrounding the military conscription law and efforts to form a new government.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir addressed the issue more than a month ago, when the public debate was at its height, warning that the military was collapsing under the weight of its manpower shortage, particularly the lack of combat soldiers.

Reports indicate increase in enlistment of ultra-Orthodox men

Within the IDF, there is a clear expectation that a coalition agreement will lead to the enlistment of ultra-Orthodox men, with a strong emphasis on integrating them into combat units rather than limiting their service to administrative and combat-support roles.

At the same time, despite the tensions, a notable trend has emerged on the ground.

Figures for the year indicate a sharp increase in the enlistment of ultra-Orthodox men into the IDF.

The number of recruits is rising and is expected to reach approximately 4,800, despite widespread demonstrations and opposition to military conscription within the ultra-Orthodox community.

This post was originally published on here. 

The pro-Palestinian activist group Global Health for Palestine distributed pamphlets at the Royal Free Hospital in Hampstead, London, condemning the review by Lord John Mann on antisemitism in the National Health Service (NHS), The Telegraph reported on Saturday.

According to photos of the pamphlet shared by the Telegraph, the activists labeled the antisemitism training recommended by Mann’s review as “pro-Israel indoctrination,” described the IHRA definition of antisemitism as “discredited and hopelessly flawed,” and called Mann’s review racist after its author reportedly said that “antisemitism is the worst of the racisms.”

The pamphlet also claimed that, under Mann’s review’s recommendations, NHS employees will not be allowed to have any Palestine colors, flags, or symbols in the workplace, including “badges, jewelry, socks, lanyards, accessories, scarves, phone covers, [and] screensavers.”

It also claimed that all criticism of Israel, Zionism, “apartheid,” or “the genocide” would be barred.

“The NHS plan is racist and divisive,” the pamphlet read. “Scrap it now and let us tackle the scourge of racism in the NHS in an equitable way which recognizes that all forms of racism are equally harmful.”

The pamphlet also alleged that “hundreds” of NHS workers have been “threatened, bullied, or victimized” for expressing solidarity with Palestine.

The activists called for health workers to discuss the issue with their trade union, for members of the public to complain to their local hospitals, and for both groups to sign a petition against Mann’s review.

Lord Mann: NHS not place for ‘extremist politicking’

In response to the pamphlets, Mann told the Telegraph that “The NHS isn’t a place for people’s extremist politicking and the public is entitled, as are all staff, to use the NHS without any hostility.”

Mann added that “This should not be happening. People seeing this kind of thing won’t want to use the NHS, and we can’t have a bar on Jewish people, or anyone else, using the NHS. The country won’t have it.”

A Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust spokesman said that their priority was “to ensure the Royal Free London is a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, and that patients, visitors, and members of staff feel respected and valued, regardless of their background or beliefs.

“Campaigning activity of any kind is not permitted on our premises, and as soon as we became aware of the leaflets being distributed, our security team asked the individuals involved to leave the site and the leaflets were destroyed.”

The chairman of Global Health for Palestine, Dr. Huda Mahmoud, said that the banning of Palestinian symbols was a form of cultural erasure. 

“Once we begin the process of de-legitimizing forms of expression inherently tied to a person’s identity and culture – notably a culture that has just undergone and is striving to survive a genocide – where will this end?” Mahmoud argued.

This post was originally published on here. 

Palestinian journalist, political analyst, and senior Balad activist Abed Abu Shehadeh was released from custody five days after being arrested by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and Israel Police over suspected contact with a foreign agent.

No charges were filed against Abu Shehadeh, who is an Israeli citizen and was originally arrested and had his home searched on Wednesday.

Abu Shehadeh’s lawyers had previously argued that authorities were investigating him solely over a published interview with former MK Azmi Bishara.

According to Adalah, the legal rights organization participating in his defense, Abu Shehadeh’s interrogation focused exclusively on a pre-election interview he conducted with Bishara in Qatar. The organization said police raised no other allegations during his questioning.

His lawyers argued that the interview, which addressed the Israeli election campaign and Palestinians, was publicly accessible and constituted legitimate journalistic work. They also disputed that Bishara was a “foreign agent” and argued that interviewing him provided no basis for criminal suspicion.

US Jewish Democratic Congress members call on Israel to release Abu Shehadeh

Abu Shehadeh’s arrest spurred widespread criticism, with three newly elected Jewish Democratic members of Congress calling on Israel on Friday to immediately release him.

In a joint letter addressed to Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, Congressmen-elect Brad Lander of New York, Daniel Biss of Illinois, and Scott Wiener of California expressed concern over Abu Shehadeh’s detention.

They urged the Israeli government to release Abu Shehadeh immediately or, if charges are filed, disclose the evidence to his legal representatives and ensure an open judicial process with full due-process protections.

Sarah Ben-Nun, Miriam Sela-Eitam, and Idan Kweller contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Democratic victory in the United States midterm elections has reshaped the balance of power in Washington, but it has not resolved the confrontation with Iran. US President Donald Trump still controls the White House, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains in office amid a difficult government-formation process, and Tehran is treating the Republican defeat as evidence that the war has imposed political costs on its adversaries. Whether the new political landscape encourages escalation or negotiation remains uncertain. 

The fragility of the situation was demonstrated on Monday, when US forces conducted limited strikes against Iranian targets on Qeshm Island, described by American officials as defensive operations rather than the resumption of major hostilities.

On Thursday, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) reported that two oil tankers and a tugboat had caught fire in separate incidents in the Strait of Hormuz, including one tanker allegedly striking a mine. The Iranian account has not been independently verified. 

The November 3 vote handed Democrats control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, after a campaign in which the economic consequences of the Iran war became a significant liability for Republicans. But the newly elected Congress will not take office until January 3, 2027. Until then, Republicans retain their existing congressional majorities, and even afterward, Democratic control would not automatically remove the president’s ability to order military action. Congress can contest funding and authorizations, but the scope of presidential war powers remains disputed. 

The question is whether another campaign would achieve what previous operations failed to settle or reproduce the same stalemate.  

For Dr. Nabi Sonboli, a senior expert at Iran’s Institute for Political and International Studies, the central uncertainty is Trump himself. “I prefer not to expect any wise decisions from Trump and his team. Confrontation is still possible,” he told The Media Line. 

Sonboli also doubts that congressional opposition could contain an escalation. “The US Congress is not able to control Trump/Netanyahu axis no matter how much costs they impose on the US.”  

Dr. Raz Zimmt, director of the Iran and the Shiite Axis research program at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, sees the US administration confronting a series of imperfect choices. “It’s very difficult to assess, first of all, what will be the decision by President Trump,” he told The Media Line. He identified a broader offensive, continued pressure, a negotiated compromise, or a limited strike as potential options. 

“One is to continue with his plans to strike Iran. I think he realizes that there are many risks involved in this third round of war against Iran,” Zimmt said. “The second option is to continue with the status quo, putting more pressure on Iran. But again, there is no guarantee that at the end of the day it will convince Iran to offer more concessions.” 

Iran unlikely to accept compromises US looking for, analyst says

A diplomatic alternative also faces obstacles. Zimmt said Iran might accept limited concessions concerning the sequence of a possible agreement, but not the substantial compromises Washington seeks. A narrower military option would carry its own danger: even an attack intended to end the confrontation could trigger an Iranian response that prolongs it. “But again, nobody can guarantee that the Iranians will not respond in a way which would escalate things even further,” he said. 

“So, what we see currently is that the immediate threat of striking Iran seems to be on hold, both because of the political calculations in the US, but also because of the continued negotiations,” Zimmt said. Limited clashes around the Strait of Hormuz and unresolved disputes over sanctions, shipping, and nuclear activity continue to make escalation possible. 

Tehran’s interpretation of the American vote is different. Dr. Ebrahim Roshandel, a former Iranian diplomat and strategic affairs analyst now based in the US, said the election result has prompted the Islamic Republic to strengthen its domestic narrative of resistance. “Now, after this result came from the election, Iranian leader and the IRGC commanders strongly try to change the narrative inside of Iran,” he told The Media Line. “At the same time, it doesn’t mean that they are going to open the new door in diplomatic way to negotiate or respond to the United States, because they have some conditions already.” 

Roshandel believes Tehran wants Arab states to reassess their reliance on Washington, preferring that they see accommodation with Iran as an alternative. “The first things, I believe, they try to give the message to regional countries, mostly Arab countries, to make a big gap between United States and the Arab countries,” he said.  

He also argued that Tehran is attentive to divisions within the administration over the war, naming senior officials whom he believes favor different approaches to negotiations and military force. Those are his interpretations, not verified accounts of the officials’ positions. 

Zimmt cautioned that the Republican defeat does not remove the military threat to Iran. “There’s no doubt that the Iranians consider the failure, the defeat of the Republicans as a major success, but we still have to remember, and the Iranians realize that, that it doesn’t solve the Iranian problem,” he said. “Trump is still very much capable of striking Iran. The Iranians certainly don’t want that to happen.” 

Israeli election leaves Netanyahu weaker than before

A parallel political uncertainty is unfolding in Israel. The October 27 Knesset election left Netanyahu’s allied parties with 53 of 120 seats, compared with 48 for a bloc associated with opposition figure Gadi Eisenkot. The two Arab-led parties won 19 seats, leaving no obvious governing majority and negotiations over the next government unresolved. Netanyahu continues to lead the country on a caretaker basis, but his political position is weaker than before the vote. 

Even so, Zimmt cautioned against assuming that a change of government would fundamentally transform Israel’s assessment of Iran. “Eisenkot might certainly adopt a less hawkish position, but when it comes to the perception in Israel, when it comes to the Iranian threats, the nuclear threat, there is no real difference between Eisenkot and Netanyahu,” he said. “And again, at the end of the day, everyone realizes that the decision is made when it comes to the Iranian file in Washington, not in Jerusalem.” 

He was equally direct about Netanyahu’s influence over Trump. “First of all, Netanyahu doesn’t make the decisions. With all due respect to Netanyahu, he probably tried to convince President Trump to strike Iran before the elections. He failed to do that, and currently he doesn’t have any ability to make Trump do anything,” he said. 

On election day, Trump said he and Netanyahu had agreed that Washington would stop providing what he described as $4 billion a year to Israel after the end of 2026. It was unclear which funding he meant or how the change would be implemented. The existing memorandum providing $3.8 billion in annual military assistance runs through September 2028.  

Beyond these political changes, Israel’s underlying security concerns remain. Zimmt disputes the idea that missile production should be the principal measure of whether another operation is necessary. “Yes, Iran still has a lot of missile capabilities, but this is not the main problem,” he said. “The main problem right now is that we still have no solution whatsoever to the nuclear capabilities which are still held by Iran.” 

Iran uranium stockpile still in unknown site

He described two unsatisfactory paths: a negotiated agreement that could deliver economic benefits to the Iranian government, or military action that might damage facilities without eliminating the knowledge, equipment, and material associated with the program. The International Atomic Energy Agency has been unable to verify the present location and composition of much of Iran’s enriched-uranium stockpile after losing access to key facilities. The agency estimated that Iran held 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60% as of June 13, 2025. That enrichment level is far above the level used in ordinary civilian power generation, but it does not establish that Iran possesses a nuclear weapon. The figure is a historical estimate, not a verified measure of the current stockpile. 

One proposed target is Pickaxe Mountain, the deeply buried complex near Natanz. Its operational status remains difficult to verify independently. For Zimmt, an aerial attack might delay the site’s use but would not settle the broader nuclear issue. 

“It won’t deprive Iran from its 440 kilograms of enriched uranium. It’s not going to deprive Iran from its hundreds of advanced centrifuges,” he said. “And the only way to deal with the underground tunnels is through special operation, and this is something which is probably not going to happen.” 

More ambitious proposals, including strikes against Iranian oil installations and other vital industries, involve a different set of risks. Zimmt said such attacks could severely worsen Iran’s economic crisis and even leave it resembling a failed state, without producing the intended concessions or a change of government. “And so, again, there are no good options right now,” he concluded. 

Roshandel’s assessment places greater emphasis on the possibilities for internal political change. He said he has urged the White House to engage with Iranian opposition figures, describing this as an alternative source of leverage. “I remember that in April I sent my third letter to the White House, and I asked President Trump to use other leverage, which is the opposition. But unfortunately, they ignored it,” he said. 

He also described domestic weaknesses that military pressure alone cannot resolve: inflation, economic dysfunction, arrests of political activists, and environmental problems. “So, I believe that we will see some breakdown. We will see some huge level of the protest is coming very shortly, maybe in two, three months, we will see that,” he said. He also predicted that the regime could collapse within a year. Zimmt, however, cautioned in a recent analysis that Iran’s deep crises do not make regime change imminent.  

The Strait of Hormuz remains both a point of strategic leverage and a potential trigger for renewed conflict. Iranian interference with shipping and the American blockade have aggravated regional uncertainty and energy costs. Gulf states have strong incentives to avoid another exchange that could endanger shipping, oil facilities, or American bases on their territory, even as they remain concerned about Iran’s military capabilities. 

Roshandel said Iran would seek concessions from regional governments by emphasizing their dependence on safe passage through the strait. At the same time, he pointed to Qatar as a potentially important intermediary. “My point of view is Qatar has the great potential right now to be more active than before this election to convince both sides to come back to the negotiation,” he said. But he also described Iranian hardliners as demanding sanctions relief, removal of the blockade, and revenge against American officials, a combination that could complicate compromise. 

Diplomatic contacts have already produced a draft proposal. According to Reuters, Iranian negotiators left Doha on Sunday after talks with Qatari mediators. An official briefed on the discussions said their departure was not due to difficulties in the negotiations, that a draft proposal was circulating, and that another meeting was possible. Tehran has linked the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to ending the US naval blockade under a seven-step framework, and Iranian officials have said that implementation could be accelerated to two days if its demands are met. No final agreement has been announced. 

Roshandel warned that the consequences of continued confrontation could extend beyond Iran’s borders. “Iran is not going to stop supporting proxy groups, and they are trying to re-emerge or reorganize the new part of the proxies, more operational like Houthis in Yemen. They can make many, many places unstable.” He also expects Tehran to continue supporting aligned armed groups in Iraq and Lebanon. 

Russia has also been involved in diplomatic contacts. Russian President Vladimir Putin met Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, in Moscow on Thursday. The Kremlin confirmed the meeting but did not disclose its precise agenda. Zimmt pointed to the encounter as a possible element in wider efforts to avert another confrontation, without claiming that it had produced a breakthrough. 

Sonboli, by contrast, emphasized the absence of trust rather than the mechanics of mediation. “Many in Iran expect the war to continue for some time and they have got ready for that,” he said. He argued that Tehran had not sought the war, asserting that: “Peace needs a level of trust and Trump/Netanyahu proved that they are not trustable.”  

He also invoked the experience of the George W. Bush administration and the costs of earlier US wars. “That war imposed 5 trillion dollars on the US and there is no reason that we believe the current administration is wiser under Trump,” he concluded.

This post was originally published on here. 

The US cannot achieve its goals of blockading Iran’s economy and shutting its trade routes because Tehran has made preparations and communicates closely with neighbors, a Revolutionary Guards spokesperson was quoted as saying on Sunday.

Hossein Mohebbi was reacting to the US military’s Task Force Iron Gate, launched to help crack down on Tehran’s movement of advanced weapons and other sanctioned material over its land borders and through the Caspian Sea.

“The Iron Gate plan is merely a wordplay, the Americans cannot achieve their objectives of imposing severe economic pressure to cause economic collapse in Iran through this approach,” Mohebbi told the semi-official Fars news agency.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

The State Attorney’s Office filed an indictment with the Central District Court in Lod on Sunday against the director of a private daycare center in Ariel and two caregivers, accusing them of more than 400 incidents of abuse and assault involving 17 infants and toddlers aged six months to three years.

The defendants are Natalia Kasilevsky, 37, director of the private Luchik daycare center, and two caregivers employed at the facility, Darina Halufa, 37, and Anna Pagelsky, 40.

Prosecution requests to keep defendants in custody

The prosecution has asked the court to keep the three women in custody until the legal proceedings conclude.

According to the state, the indictment, filed by attorney Yehonatan Ayalon-Hirsch of the Central District Attorney’s Office, describes an exceptionally severe pattern of prolonged violence and abuse against infants and young toddlers at the Luchik daycare center, some of whom were only a few months old.

The defendants allegedly exploited their positions at the daycare center, the imbalance of power between themselves and the children, and the toddlers’ complete dependence on them. On numerous occasions, they allegedly assaulted and abused the children, causing them physical and psychological pain.

The indictment charges the defendants with multiple offenses committed jointly, including abuse of a minor or helpless person by a responsible caregiver, assault of a helpless person by a responsible caregiver causing actual bodily harm, and assault under aggravated circumstances.

According to the indictment, the defendants implemented a series of cruel “punishment methods” at the daycare center.

The “choking method” involved gripping the toddlers’ heads and forcibly obstructing their airways using their hands, paper, or cloth, while holding the backs of their necks to prevent them from moving.

The defendants allegedly shook the toddlers, bent their heads and bodies forward, and forcibly pressed them against mattresses for extended periods.

Workers allegedly obstructed children’s airways

In some cases, the defendants repeatedly obstructed the children’s airways even after they began gasping for air, turned red, and struggled to breathe, allegedly causing them to become disoriented and lose their balance.

The “restraint method” involved aggressively wrapping the toddlers’ bodies in fabric and blankets, with their arms pinned against their bodies, and tightly binding them in a manner that prevented any movement while placing them on their stomachs.

In some cases, caregivers Anna and Darina allegedly force-fed toddlers while they were restrained. According to the indictment, the caregivers tilted the children’s heads backward, applied physical pressure to force their jaws open, and rapidly and forcibly pushed pureed food into their mouths.

They also allegedly wiped the children’s faces aggressively and painfully with paper. Another alleged punishment method involved confining toddlers in a closed, dark room for significant periods without supervision.

The children were allegedly left in the room as punishment, while their cries and attempts to leave were ignored. In addition to the severe physical harm and abuse allegedly inflicted on the children, the indictment also charges the defendants with psychologically abusing the toddlers.

According to the prosecution, the defendants frequently carried out the alleged acts in the presence of other toddlers at the daycare center, who witnessed the incidents.

The children were repeatedly and continuously exposed to acts of violence and abuse allegedly committed against other toddlers. In some cases, the children reportedly responded by crying and approaching the child who had been harmed.

The prosecution argues that exposing the toddlers to the physical abuse of other children also constituted psychological abuse and has therefore included an additional charge of psychological abuse against the defendants.

The case was investigated by a special investigative team from the Samaria District’s investigative and intelligence unit and the Ariel Police Station.

This post was originally published on here. 

A clear majority is emerging in the Knesset to replace Speaker Amir Ohana (Likud), with 67 MKs who do not support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu compared with 46 who do, raising the question of whether Ohana could delay a vote on his replacement despite a 2020 High Court of Justice ruling against former speaker Yuli Edelstein.

But what happens when an outgoing Knesset speaker refuses to convene the Knesset to elect a new speaker, or delays the decision for political reasons?

A precedent already exists involving former Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein (Likud) several years ago. The High Court ordered him to convene the Knesset to vote on a new speaker, but Edelstein refused, resigned, and violated the court’s ruling.

It should be emphasized that Ohana, a close associate of Netanyahu, has already stated: “The customary time for electing a Knesset speaker is when the government is formed. The exception is if a letter is submitted bearing the signatures of a majority of Knesset members, at least 61 MKs, requesting that a speaker be elected at an earlier date.”

In other words, according to Ohana, he will allow a vote on his replacement if 61 signatures are submitted.

“As I have already responded, including publicly, we will respect the members of Knesset,” Ohana continued. “If a majority of them request such a discussion, I will schedule it for an earlier date, no later than one week. There will be no desperate clinging to office. The media can stop promoting conspiracy theories. I wish the Knesset and the State of Israel success.”

The 2020 precedent: Yuli Edelstein’s refusal to hold a vote

This is an appropriate time to revisit the case of former Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein.

It happened in 2020. Elections for the 23rd Knesset were held on March 2, 2020, and its swearing-in was scheduled for March 16.

Ahead of the swearing-in, several Knesset factions representing a combined 61 MKs approached the Knesset speaker and requested that the parliamentary agenda for the swearing-in include, among other things, a proposal to appoint a permanent Knesset speaker.

Edelstein, however, refused, arguing that “the need of the hour for the State of Israel is a broad unity government.”

At the time, negotiations were underway between Likud and Blue and White, led by Benny Gantz, to form a unity government, and there was an expectation that an MK not from Likud would be appointed speaker.

Edelstein argued that “hasty political moves, such as electing a permanent Knesset speaker and passing controversial legislation, are intended to put an end to the possibility of unity that the people want.”

Petitions were filed with the High Court by the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, the Blue and White faction, the Labor-Meretz faction, the Yisrael Beytenu faction, and additional parties.

The petitioners argued that the Knesset Speaker had acted under a personal conflict of interest, without authority, and unreasonably. They further claimed that his decision not to include the election of a permanent Knesset speaker on the parliamentary agenda was tainted by improper considerations.

They pointed to Section 2(b) of the Knesset Rules of Procedure, which stipulates that the Knesset speaker must be elected no later than the date on which the Knesset convenes for the purpose of forming a government.

According to the petitioners, that provision establishes the final deadline for electing a permanent speaker.

They stressed that the incumbent speaker, who continued to serve under the principle of parliamentary continuity, was thwarting the will of a majority of MKs, thereby undermining public trust in the branches of government and the principle of separation of powers.

Edelstein responded to the High Court that the matter was “subject to his broad discretion regarding the setting of the Knesset plenum’s agenda, and therefore he acted within his authority, reasonably and in accordance with customary practice when he took into account considerations relating to coalition negotiations, particularly against the backdrop of the coronavirus outbreak and the state of emergency in the country.”

Likud also maintained that there was no justification for intervening in the discretion exercised by its party member.

During a hearing held on March 22, 2020, the Knesset’s legal adviser was inclined to argue that electing a permanent Knesset speaker before the political balance of power and the composition of the future government had become clear could lead to “a constitutional malfunction.”

Such a situation, he argued, could make it extremely difficult for the government to function if the permanent Knesset speaker ultimately elected belonged to the opposition. He therefore considered it appropriate to wait a further short period.

High Court: The Knesset is not the government’s cheerleading squad

In her ruling, then-Supreme Court president Esther Hayut explained that the general rule is that “the authority to determine the Knesset’s agenda and the timing of its debates rests with the Knesset speaker. These matters are distinctly ‘internal parliamentary’ affairs, and therefore, as a rule, this Court refrains from intervening in them.”

In this case, however, the question was whether the circumstances fell within the exceptional category of cases in which there was concern about harm to the “fabric of democratic life” or the foundations of the parliamentary system. After all, Edelstein had effectively prevented the Knesset from convening to replace him.

According to Hayut, “Contrary to Edelstein’s position, we believe that given the fact that this is an acting speaker serving by virtue of the principle of continuity, and given that this is a matter that directly concerns him, the discretion granted to him in this context is not broad, but rather extremely limited and narrowly defined.”

She wrote that “the flaw in this conduct lies first and foremost in the concern that it amounts to thwarting the will of the voter.”

Hayut added, “The Knesset speaker’s position that the election of a permanent Knesset speaker is dependent on moves to form a government amounts to putting the cart before the horse. The Knesset is sovereign. The Knesset is not the ‘government’s cheerleading squad.'”

She also addressed the political deadlock at the time.

“Edelstein justified his refusal by noting, among other things, that the citizens of Israel long for a government to finally be established in Israel after three election campaigns,” she wrote.

However, Hayut explained that Edelstein had placed a political consideration concerning the formation of a government at the heart of his refusal.

Ultimately, the court ruled that “the continued refusal to allow a vote in the Knesset plenum on the election of a permanent Knesset speaker undermines the foundations of the democratic process.

It clearly harms the Knesset’s status as an independent branch of government, as well as the process of transition of power, and these concerns become all the more significant as the days pass since the swearing-in of the 23rd Knesset.”

The other justices joined Hayut’s position and ordered Edelstein to convene the Knesset for a vote on his replacement as soon as possible.

Edelstein refused. He decided to resign rather than comply with the High Court’s ruling, triggering a major political storm. Behind the scenes, reports said members of his own party pressured him to take that step.

Edelstein’s refusal did indeed create a delay, and ultimately agreements were reached on a unity government between Likud and Blue and White.

Initially, Benny Gantz was appointed temporary Knesset speaker, and a permanent speaker was subsequently appointed.

A second High Court ruling: Edelstein violated the court’s order

In a subsequent ruling, the High Court determined that Edelstein had violated its order.

“Never before in the history of the state has a government official openly and defiantly refused to comply with a judicial order, stating that his conscience does not allow him to comply with the judgment. This is how Edelstein chose to act,” the court ruled.

An arrangement was ultimately reached that enabled the implementation of the previous ruling, led by Amir Peretz, the longest-serving member of Knesset.

Edelstein’s political career appears never to have recovered from his refusal to comply with the High Court.

Edelstein, who until then had been a rising force within Likud and had even been discussed as a potential future contender for the party leadership, reached a point where he found himself outside the Knesset following the most recent elections.

This was also due to Netanyahu’s efforts to weaken his political rivals and demand absolute loyalty.

Ohana’s record on High Court rulings

It should be remembered that compliance with High Court rulings in general is not necessarily a red line for Ohana.

At times, noncompliance appears to have become a political calling card for him.

One example is the High Court’s recent decision to hold another round of voting to elect the state comptroller, a decision Ohana effectively stalled, drawing harsh criticism from the High Court.

For the time being, however, Ohana has announced that he will convene the Knesset to vote on his replacement if 61 MKs demand it.

This post was originally published on here. 

Many political commentators in the Israeli media sympathetic to the opposition have, since the elections and the surprising success of the two Arab parties, the Joint List and Ra’am, argued that just as one cannot doubt the commendable treatment of Arab physicians, pharmacists, and tradesmen toward their Jewish clients, one can hardly doubt the right of the Arab parties, to which the Arab public overwhelmingly voted, to be part of the government and government decision-making at the highest level.

This argument, at face value so inviting, hardly holds water for the Jewish majority in a state, which is legally described as “Jewish and democratic.”

The Jewish majority has every right to test the relationship between individual Arab behavior and their conduct and aspirations as a collective group towards the state, its Jewish majority, and its many declared enemies in the near and far.

It has every right to question whether the lists Israel’s Arab citizens voted for Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, to which the overwhelming majority of Israel’s Jewish citizens adhere.

That there is an Arab collective, which is more than the sum of the individuals belonging to it, is beyond doubt. Presuming that there was no widespread fraud in the election process, at least 85% of Arab voters voted for the two Arab lists whose candidates were overwhelmingly Arab and Muslim.

This outcome reflects a political homogeneity greater than any ideological or social subgroup in Jewish society, including the haredim (ultra-Orthodox), whose exclusively haredi parties secured only 9% of the vote, even though haredim comprise 14% of the Israeli population.

It is also clear from their voting behavior that Israel’s Arab citizens are very different from their Jewish counterparts, of whom only a tiny fraction voted for these two lists.

This Arab collective clearly had other choices. If Arab voters were mainly concerned with day-to-day issues, as many political commentators and opposition politicians claim, they would have been better served by voting for the Democrats or Yashar, as over a quarter of the Arab electorate did 30 years ago.

Strategically, had two-thirds of Arab voters cast their votes for these two, albeit Zionist, parties, they would have clinched victory for the opposition.

The 13 seats their votes would have tallied (of a total of 19), coupled with the 48 seats the opposition procured, would have secured the 61 seats needed to form a government, perhaps even a stable one. This means that the Arab voters were also, if not predominantly, preoccupied by ideological and identity-driven concerns.

It is important to gauge then the positions these two lists, for whom the overwhelming majority of Arab citizens voted, take towards the nature of the state, their relationship to the Jewish majority, and towards Israel’s enemies.

The findings based on the content matter on their official sites paint a troubling picture from the point of view of most Jewish Israelis. Neither site acknowledges that Israel is the state of the Jewish people.

Instead, one finds an exhortation of a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel, with east Jerusalem as its capital.

In the more radical Joint List, this statement is followed by the need “to find a just solution to the refugee issue and their right of return in accordance with international resolutions, foremost among them Resolution 194.”

The Joint List fails, of course, to mention that United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 (passed in December 1948) also calls for the establishment of a Jewish state alongside an Arab state 11 times.

Pointless comparison

While for most Jewish voters Gaza evokes the October 7 massacre, in the Joint List, reference to Gaza reflects a totally different perspective:

“We work to consolidate the cessation of the war and the genocide and prevent their resumption, to lift the siege on Gaza and end military control over it, to guarantee aid, reconstruction, and the return of the displaced, and to resume the operations of international organizations, foremost among them the Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, UNRWA.”

UNRWA is an organization in which some of whose members participated in the October 7 massacre.

Some may argue that the haredim do not accept a Jewish and democratic state either, and that just as haredim readily take part in the government, so should the Arab parties.

The comparison is patently false. The haredi parties clearly identify with the Jewishness of the state – in fact, they decry that there should be more of it than less.

The haredim, as individuals or as a collective, have rarely been involved in terrorism or hostile mass behavior against fellow citizens, as occurred among Israel’s Arab citizens in the first two weeks of the second intifada in October 2001, in which at least one Jewish town, Nof Hagalil (Upper Nazareth), was besieged.

And in the May 2021 bout of violence between Israel and Hamas, during which Jewish Israelis in mixed towns (Acre, Lod, and Ramle) were seriously maimed, one was killed, and nine synagogues were burnt down.

Certainly, except for Neturei Karta, haredim, or the parties they voted for, do not identify with Israel’s enemies. In Arab media sites, closely linked to the Arab parties, such as Arab48, Israel is almost always to blame just as much as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are almost always exonerated.

When the overwhelming majority of Israel’s Arab citizens vote for parties which, at so many levels, do not accept the basic formula of the Jewish and democratic state, Israel’s Jewish citizens and parties that represent them have every right to distinguish between the Arab citizens’ civil rights as individuals and the claim to have the parties they have elected.

The latter seek to share in government and influence decision-making on matters related to the state’s fundamental identity and the crucial security issues it faces.

The writer is a senior researcher at JISS and a professor emeritus at Bar-Ilan University.

This post was originally published on here. 

Just as Jews in general do not like to be defined by negative stereotypes, non-Jews who have nothing against Jews per se, but who are anti-Israel, do not like to be labeled as antisemites.

Similarly, Jews who are not Zionists do not like to be accused of being self-hating.

Both the coalition and opposition parties in the Knesset are united in their desire for a Jewish and democratic state, and a government coalition that includes only members of Zionist oriented parties.

This excludes the ultra-Orthodox (haredi) parties and the Arab parties.

The haredi parties are not only non-Zionist, but also object to Israel being called a Jewish state instead of a state of and for the Jews.

In their perception, a Jewish state is more or less a theocracy. It is not a Jewish state when Shabbat is violated by cars; where there are non-kosher restaurants that operate seven days a week; where not everyone fasts on Yom Kippur; where family purity laws are ignored by large segments of the population; and where homosexuality is accepted as yet another norm. The issue of an openly gay speaker of the Knesset rankles the haredi parties, and that is one of the reasons that they want to replace Amir Ohana. 

The list is of haredi objections to Israel calling itself a Jewish state is much longer, but the above mentioned are some of the most obvious reasons.

As for the Arabs – one can hardly expect them to be Zionists, or to be supportive of Jewish law.

At best, they can believe in a democratic state.

Admittedly, there are Christian Zionists, but most are strong believers in biblical prophecy, which puts them on the same side as Zionists.

Haredim also believe in biblical prophecy, which perhaps places them in the role of authentic Zionists as distinct from people who believe that Israel is the Jewish homeland, but observe very few of the Jewish religious laws.

While the Zionist Movement was founded in 1897, well before the Holocaust, it was only after the Holocaust that Jews began to come to Israel in droves. Efforts by Jabotinsky and others to persuade Jews to relocate to pre-state Israel yielded few positive responses.

But during and immediately after the Holocaust there were anti-Jewish riots in several Muslim majority countries as well as in Europe and Africa, and operations such as Aliya Bet, Ezra and Nechemiah, Magic Carpet, Operation Moses, and other mass immigration projects were launched.

Not everyone who came to Israel in the early years of the state was a Zionist – certainly not the haredi rabbis and lay leaders of haredi communities.

Today, the various haredi communities collectively number some 1.5 million souls, and the numbers will continue to increase, because of the high birthrate in haredi families.

Many Arab families also have a high birthrate.

Despite the fact that many Israeli Arabs have integrated successfully into mainstream Israel, they are not always treated equally – especially after October 7.

If some of the things that are said about them, coupled with certain restrictions that are proposed or imposed against them, were to be said and enacted against Jews, there would be a huge outcry of antisemitism. 

Eventually, whether future governments like it or not, Israel will have to accept a state of all its citizens or a Palestinian state.

The recent Arab turnout for the elections was proof that the Arab population is on the way to receiving the same consideration as its Jewish neighbors.

There will be more educational facilities, more community services; more access to government offices; better job opportunities – and much more.

They may also influence issues of legality such as the so-called illegal Bedouin villages in the Negev and the West Bank. Bedouins serve the army, and Bedouins rescued people during the Hamas attack on October 7. They deserve to have their villages recognized and legalized.

Arab Israeli’s integration into Israel

Israel justifiably rejects all charges of apartheid. Arabs mingle with Jews on public transport. They work as doctors and nurses in all of Israel’s hospitals; they attend Israeli universities; and most important, they are represented in the Knesset – and not only in Arab parties. But they are still unofficially barred from sitting in the government, although there have been a few exceptions in relation to Arabs who were members of non-Arab parties. The first Muslim Arab to serve in the cabinet was Labor Party MK Raleb Majadle, who in 2007 was appointed minister of science, culture and sport.

Yousef Jabareen, who heads the Hadash faction in the Joint List, wants to see greater Arab integration into mainstream Israel. Hadash has frequently had Jewish politicians among its Knesset representatives. Currently, there’s Ofer Cassif, but in the past there have been Dov Khenin, Tamar Gozansky, and Meir Vilner. 

Vilner was the last and youngest person to sign Israel’s Declaration of Independence.

Perhaps it would be beneficial for representatives of both the coalition and the opposition who are presently vying for control of the government to study the list of signatories and what they represented. The signatures on the declaration provide a fine example of unity without uniformity.

This post was originally published on here. 

NASA announced a new series of investments and initiatives on Saturday to advance its technological capabilities with the eventual goal of establishing a long-term base on the moon, including a $10 billion contract for a cargo lander network which several companies will compete for.

Among the companies in the running for the contract were Elon Musk‘s SpaceX, Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin, and Northrop Grumman Space Systems, a company which also sells weapons to Israel. Six other companies are also competing.

The initiative for which the companies are eligible is the second phase of NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS). Over the course of the 10-year framework, companies are expected to provide delivery services to the moon, including managing, building, and operating landers for NASA technology and infrastructure.

Several other projects and developments related to the eventual sustained lunar presence are in the works, NASA announced at the MAX POWER aerospace expo and air show.

Among these projects are a nuclear-powered moon rover called PROMISE (Polar Rover for Observation, Mapping, and In-Situ Exploration), a Mini-Communications and Solar Tower (miniCAST), and several launch order contracts with various space transport companies for multiple different mission types.

NASA head: When astronauts return to moon, start of lunar base will be there

“We are building the Moon Base mission by mission,” NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said. 

“Today’s announcements expand nearly every part of that campaign, using the playbook that carried NASA through its greatest eras: fly often, learn, apply those lessons, and get more better and more capable with every mission. When our astronauts return to the moon, they will arrive with the first elements of the Moon Base already waiting for them on the surface.”

Carlos García-Galán, manager of the Moon Base Program, said that NASA had made “incredible strides” towards its goal of establishing a permanent lunar outpost.

“We’ve consolidated numerous efforts into a streamlined program, evolving our human exploration architecture into an iterative and sustained campaign for Moon Base technology development and implementation,” he said. “Most importantly, we’ve taken action, awarding new contracts and forging new partnerships to accelerate development.”

This post was originally published on here. 

If art, regardless of discipline, is going to maintain its prerequisite cutting edge, there has got to be an injection of new blood from time to time.

Yasmin Gariv embraces that view wholeheartedly and is putting it into good entertaining practice as artistic director of the Fluorescent – Vertigo Jerusalem festival, which takes place in Jerusalem and down the road at Kibbutz Netiv Halamed-Heh, at the home of the Vertigo dance company, November 9-13.

Notwithstanding her tenderness of years, all of 26, Gariv is now into her third stint in charge of programming of the annual event she founded.

This year’s offering, which is supported by the Jerusalem Foundation and the Jerusalem Municipality, confirms she is a firm believer in keeping things fresh and on the creative edge, and giving budding artists – choreographers and dancers alike – a golden opportunity to strut their nascent stuff. 

The forthcoming festival is officially the third full-blown edition, although it was preceded by a smaller water-testing debut with no thoughts of the future.

Fluorescent is, in fact, a default development spawned by Gariv’s frustration with banging her head against a brick wall.

“As an artist, a choreographer, I was continually submitting my work to festivals, and I kept on being turned down,” she recalls. “Then a friend of mine said we should do something ourselves.”

Getting the show on the road

Vertigo was a natural go-to starting point for Gariv and her pal.

“Sigal [Rot] from Vertigo was my teacher in high school, and we knew the people from Vertigo, and that they are very open to new ideas.

“We got in touch with them. We told them we weren’t asking anything from them other than to give us the use of their studio. We said we were planning on putting on some evening shows and nothing more.”

The ball was well and truly set in motion after those initial hesitant baby steps.

“We didn’t know if people would turn up to see us, but it was fine in the end,” Gariv notes.

That was fine for a one-off escapade. She and her co-initiator had had a dream and gone for it with gusto. And Gariv had exorcised some of her pent-up aggravation at having her quest for choreographic expression repeatedly stymied. 

However, there was more on offer where that came from, at least for Gariv.

“A year later, my friend said that running a festival was not for her. But I wanted to carry on. I felt there was something very exciting about the festival. We established a festival for young artists, only young artists.”

Before anyone comes up with plaintive claims of ageism, Gariv qualifies that epithet.

“‘Young’ means young in terms of experience,” she explains, adding there was a degree of remedial prioritization to her programming ethos. “This was for artists who hadn’t had works shown at festivals in Israel, who hadn’t built up a résumé. It was for people who were new on the scene.”

And so Fluorescent came to be, in earnest.

It’s all fine and dandy having some fanciful notion, however long-cherished and heartfelt, but it is an entirely different ballgame making it happen.

Artistic realms are indeed a wonderful thing, and a boon to our spiritual – and, by projection, physical – well-being, but even artists have to put bread on the table. For that you need hard cash.

There was a little of that in the offing for Gariv, enough for her to believe she could give the festival a real chance of becoming a bona fide corporeal reality.

“A year later we got a small budget from the Jerusalem Municipality, thanks to Vertigo, and we thought we needed a name [for the festival].”

Lighting up the dance floor

The illumination moniker was prompted by venue circumstances.

“We chose ‘Fluorescent’ because the shows took place in a studio, with fluorescent lighting,” comes the self-explanatory reasoning. “We thought that was pretty cool,” Gariv chuckles.

There is a deeper, artistically existential aspect in there, too. “We dancers always say we dance under the lighting, and we give our heart and soul to it. We are always under the fluorescent lighting and working hard.”

In truth, the forthcoming edition of the festival is not a purely artificially lit affair. After the successes of the last three years, Gariv decided it was time to spread the venture’s programmatic wings. She – justifiably – proudly rolls out the numerical and logistical collateral.

“The festival has grown threefold. We now have five days, 14 shows, and 27 artists. We have outdoor shows as well as indoor ones. But the main change is that it is now not just a dance festival.”

The disciplinary flex comes directly from the artistic director’s evolving bio.

“In recent years, I have become a circus artist, too,” she reveals. “So we have made the transition to a multidisciplinary festival, with the emphasis on contemporary dance and circus art, performance art, and music.”

It was a natural development. “For me it’s really exciting because it reflects my own growth as an artist, and there is the growth of the festival, which go together.”

Sounds like a seamless fit. 

According to Gariv, that also answers a market need.

“When I got into the contemporary circus art domain, I saw there are lots of gifted artists here – the scene is developing – but there was no contemporary circus festival for adults in Israel. There weren’t many platforms for presenting the art form here.”

Any artistic-entertainment proposition that comes with a “contemporary” tag can leave large sectors of the cultural consumership raising an eyebrow or two, and with the fear of having to contend with something beyond their comfort zone.

That, says Gariv, does not apply to the latest addition to her professional toolbox.

“First, I recommend to everyone to come to our festival, to see and experience and be surprised. But circus art has the advantage of having a sort of wow factor to begin with. That is integral to it, and draws people even if they are not from the specific field. So I believe that it [circus art] can do well in Israel.”

Getting in on the circus act

Gariv says the move from dance into circus art performance was both smooth and natural for her.

“Circus performance is dance, too – aerial dance,” she posits.

It is, she says, basically just a matter of switching the corporeal onus from the legs to the arms. That, of course, requires some upper body muscle building.

“I use a metal hoop which weighs about 9-10 kilos,” she advises. That’s quite a schlep. “I recently performed in South Korea, and I took my hoop with me.” 

That engagement resulted from Gariv’s participation in the international dance showcase which takes place annually at the Suzanne Dellal Centre in Tel Aviv in front of artistic directors and other professionals from relevant artistic areas, from all over the world.

The hope is that some of the acts the visitors see will convince them to consider slotting some of the Israeli artists in their various festivals and other events dotted around the globe. 

Happily, Gariv, whose CV to date includes a two-year stint with an Italian dance company, got the nod and was able to strut her stuff to Korean audiences and, in so doing, possibly convey to Korean culture consumers the notion that there are Israelis who add beauty to our lives.

That presents a very different image of this country compared to the one they get via their news outlets. That suggests a win-win scenario for everyone. 

Like the rest of us, artists, too, continue to bear the scars of that cataclysmic day just over three years ago now. That, Gariv says, comes through in her life and her work.

“As a dancer, I have changed a lot since October 7. There is an added depth to the movements I make. But I think everyone, everyone in Israel who experienced that, is not the same.”

For an artist who uses her body as a means of conveying her artistic ideas, that necessarily has to affect the way she expresses her creative ideas.

“When you change as a person, you change as an artist,” she declares.

That, no doubt, will be palpably evident right across the five-day program in Jerusalem and Netiv Halamed-Heh, particularly in view of the festival’s stated intent, which includes “facilitating a direct encounter between the artists and the audiences.”

I asked Gariv for some enlightenment on the way she and her co-professionals aim to achieve that. 

Dance for all

The festival is clearly not tailored to the type of ambiance John Lennon so famously mocked when The Beatles appeared at the Royal Albert Hall in London, in 1963.

Before the Fab Four’s last number, Lennon asked the audience for help, cheekily suggesting that the people in the cheaper seats clap their hands, while the others “just rattle their jewelry.”

Fluorescent is a grassroots endeavor for everyone, regardless of societal stature or bank balance.

“The [majority of the] shows take place in studios. When you go to a studio show, you are sitting right in front of the dancers; you see their sweat and their facial expressions. It’s not like sitting in front of the stage at the opera house, and you catch some sort of silhouette [of the performers].

“With us, you really live the show. You can even feel the tremors of the floorboards, as the dancers jump and move about.”

Having been in the audience over at the kibbutz, I can attest to that alluring sense of intimacy.

Gariv set her artistic directorial sights on crafting an added-value experiential consumer package.

“There is the [physical] proximity between the audience and the artist, and there are all sorts of connections in the festival,” she notes.

“There is a dance workshop for everyone, and a salsa dance slot in which anyone can participate. And there’s an outdoor salsa show. We want to get the members of the audience moving a bit,” Gariv laughs. “That’s the idea.” 

She wants to spread the word as wide and as far as she possibly can.

“We’d like to introduce new sectors of the public to contemporary dance and art. We want people to know there are good things happening here.”

Amen to that.

Simply put, Gariv wants us all to have a good time and, while we’re at it, let our hair down. And why not?

A quote variously attributed to the likes of Mark Twain, National Baseball Hall of Fame inductee Satchel Paige, and celebrated American educator William Purkey, urges us to: “Sing like no one is listening. Love like you’ve never been hurt. Dance like nobody’s watching.”

The result of that laissez-faire philosophy is that you – as the quote suggests – “live like it’s heaven on earth.” Shaking a leg or two is clearly a good idea for us all.

While she says that, as a professional dancer, she understandably doesn’t subscribe to the idea of going through her paces unobserved – that would be defeating the point of her whole entertaining exercise – she gets a kick out of sharing her love with the layman. 

“When I dance with someone who is not a trained dancer, I feel like I am passing to them a ball full of energy. It’s a two-way discussion. I always end up getting people up on their feet and dancing,” she chuckles.

“When I dance at parties and weddings, you’ll see, in the end, everyone gets up and follows what I do. For me it’s a way to communicate and to give something to someone else.”

First airings

Gariv says she is looking forward to the third edition of Fluorescent, and is eagerly anticipating catching the premieres in the lineup.

“There are brand-new works which we will see for the first time, together with the audience. That is part of the festival credo, to allow artists to present new creations.

“They send in videos of themselves, explaining the rough outlines of the work they are putting together, and then the artistic jury decides which make it into the festival.”

That sounds like a commensurately daring approach to adopt for a definitively down-to-earth venture. 

As befitting a vehicle for getting young choreographers out there into the public eye, the accent is also very much on the future.

“We want to allow young artists to advance themselves. We hope that, in a few years’ time, the youngsters who appear at our festival will perform at the biggest festivals in the country, and we will have the satisfaction of having offered them their first opportunity.”

With an albeit seasoned professional 26-year-old at its head, there is a decent chance that Fluorescent will lead the way into new artistic domains and keep the discipline buzzing.

“Israeli dancers are the best in the world,” Gariv announces unceremoniously. “Before Oct. 7, there was hardly a dance festival in the world without Israelis on the program.

“But we have to keep it fresh. Older artistic directors might feel it is more important to preserve the culture and to look after the veteran dancers. But we also need younger artistic directors. I represent something a lot younger that pays attention to young artists. We need both.”

Fluorescent may not feature any of the old guard, such as peerless, still active 87-year-old dancer-choreographer Rina Schenfeld, but there will be a much-needed invigorating breath or two of fresh air blowing in Jerusalem and at Netiv Halamed-Heh next week.

For tickets and more information: vertigo.org.il/dance-education/festivalfluo-2

This post was originally published on here. 

Seventeen people were injured in a collision between a bus and a minibus on the southbound Ayalon Highway near the Halakha Interchange on Sunday morning, Israel Police said.

Medical officials said the injured were evacuated from the scene for treatment. Tel Aviv District traffic police are responding to the incident, while traffic accident investigators are on their way to the scene, the police reported.

MDA paramedics and medical technicians responding to the incident said, “the minibus driver was trapped, in a state of reduced consciousness, and suffering from injuries to his head and limbs.”

“During the rescue operations, we provided him with medical treatment, including administering medication and stopping the bleeding,” the responders added.

“A 17-year-old girl was moderately injured and suffered injuries to her limbs, while the other passengers were walking around with minor injuries.”

The medical responders noted that everyone at the scene was treated, and some are being evacuated to Wolfson, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, and Ichilov hospitals.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

With the fall cultural season in full swing, the Jerusalem Biennale is doing what it does best: bringing contemporary art to numerous locations across the city, from established museums and galleries to unexpected venues such as the former National Library at Givat Ram.

Yet this can be a difficult season for new immigrant artists. Without a basic command of Hebrew, those who left thriving art careers behind often don’t know where to begin finding opportunities to participate in major open-call exhibitions.

Dr. Anat Chaskalovic, who spent two decades living and working as an artist abroad, knows what it feels like to be an outsider and brings a special empathy to a new mission to help olim artists.

“I returned home after 20 years in Paris with experience as an artist and a scholar of Jewish and Israeli heritage. I understand how disorienting it can be to enter a cultural world without the right connections, and I wanted to help immigrant artists,” she said.

Together with Arielle Scemama, the longtime coordinator of the Greater Baka Community Center immigrant programs, at 3 Issachar St. (known in Hebrew as Minhal Kehilati Baka Rabati), they began to develop a strategy to help immigrant artists across a broad area of southern Jerusalem, from Talbiyeh to Talpiot, have opportunities to exhibit and meet one another.

Baka Artists’ Community

The result is the new Baka Artists’ Community, whose first group exhibition took place on November 1 at the Greater Baka Community Center’s spacious multipurpose room, renovated from their former library.

Scemama describes the center as a place where residents can propose ideas, not merely sign up for classes. “People come to express a need, people come to offer a service,” Scemama explained, adding: “The center’s approach is to listen to what residents need and what they can contribute.”

Since June, Chaskalovic has devoted her time to gathering artists and organizing activities. The group consists mostly of immigrants from the United States, alongside members from France and Brazil, Israeli artists, and Chaskalovic herself, a ceramic artist. Men and women participate. Longtime olim exhibit alongside newcomers. Chaskalovic provides translation in French and English.

“The problem is that they don’t know curators, and curators don’t know them,” Chaskalovic said of newcomers trying to enter the local art scene. “So it’s a [closed] circle. They feel alone. They can’t break in.” Renting space, navigating exhibition requirements, and finding professional contacts can be daunting, she notes, especially for artists who have not yet built networks in Israel.

“Organizing a group exhibition involves more than asking artists to bring pictures. Someone has to establish a theme, gather information and images, decide what can fit in the available space, invite the public, and coordinate the installation,” she added.

The community’s first exhibition, held Sunday, November 1, from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m., brought together 10 artists selected by Chaskalovic. The landscape theme embraced a wide range of styles and media. Tamra Walker photographs the sublime in a Dead Sea sunset ablaze with orange light. Matan Sacofsky turns his attention to the rooftops and intimate architecture of a Jerusalem neighborhood. Rochie Usprich paints a waterfall and refreshing greenery, while Bonnie Katzenstein notices the solitary charm of a garden staircase.

Other works move further from conventional landscape. Rikki Rose Horowitz’s abstract colors draw on her lifetime work as an energy healer and her knowledge of Kabbalah. Sarah Rose’s exuberant collage is a delight to the senses with its dynamic forms, rich colors, and patterns. The range of art makes the point: there is no single way to see a place, or to make art about living here in Israel.

The 10 exhibiting artists drew enough friends, family, and visitors to fill the former library. Exhibitor Horowitz described an atmosphere of camaraderie rather than competition. The exhibition was open for one evening only, a test of the center’s facilities for future shows. With limited wall space, artists displayed their work on easels and tables, and everything had to be taken home at the end of the evening.

The limitations made the evening an interesting test of what a neighborhood community center like Minhal Kehilati Baka Rabati can offer artists. A gallery may provide established systems for hanging, publicity, and supervision; a community center can offer a different advantage – an accessible introduction to neighbors who might never visit a conventional gallery but simply drop by for their ulpan or exercise class.

“I think it was very successful in terms of the turnout. I would do it again,” added Horowitz, who now serves as a volunteer founding member of the Baka Artists’ Community committee. She described artists admiring one another’s work, offering encouragement, and helping each other make the most of the limited display space.

For collage artist Rose, the evening was a first opportunity to show her work publicly. “I’ve never shown anyone what I’ve done before,” she said. “It’s so nice to get their reaction. It motivates me to show more.” She felt her work had been received and appreciated as she intended.

Chaskalovic is clear that this is not a commercial gallery. She encourages the group members to give talks, lead art workshops, share contacts, and propose outings. Chaskalovic also wants more established Israeli artists to mentor newcomers, sharing their experiences and approaches to making art. “The aim is also that they don’t feel alone,” Chaskalovic said. “They can feel that they can speak, they can exchange.”

Jerusalem Artists Circle: Keeping the connections alive

Jerusalem Artists Circle (JAC) was founded by painter and art teacher Leorah Parker, who similarly lives in the Baka area.

Prior to making aliyah in 2010, Parker had run a successful gallery and studio in Old Town Manassas, Virginia, served on juries, and knew what it took to organize shows and bring people together. “Yet in Jerusalem, I found that the local art world could be difficult to navigate,” she explained.

Without a permanent space until now, she describes JAC as a free, informal network for artists, photographers, and people who love art to meet informally and for exhibitions. “Our membership has always included men and women, and the JAC’s appeal extends beyond Jerusalem to other parts of Israel,” she said, adding: “Inviting art lovers as well as art makers is deliberate: artists need audiences, conversations and potential buyers.”

Parker is equally candid about the difficulties of breaking into the art world. Parker’s paintings of Jerusalem are both atmospheric and capture a romantic view of the city she’s called home for more than 15 years. The Moon Over Yehuda finds a quiet moment beneath a moonlit sky and palm tree. In Promenade in Arnona, a woman rests beside a tree and the familiar stone of Jerusalem. “I don’t think we’re left out on purpose. But often we don’t know what to ask for or where to go. I look forward to connecting with this new group in Baka,” she said.

Despite not having a permanent brick-and-mortar home for JAC, Parker has arranged exhibitions, lectures, artist evenings, films, gallery and museum visits, and cultural excursions, and, for a watershed upcoming birthday, invited JAC friends to join her in a hot air balloon adventure over Afula.

Over the summer, Parker organized A Common Thread at the Jerusalem Theatre, bringing together Jay Avilev, Jack Pillemer, Estelle Reingold, Carol Racklin-Siegel, and herself. Though their styles and media differed, she saw their shared involvement in JAC as the thread connecting them.

“Finding places to exhibit takes persistence,” she explained. The Jerusalem Theatre and Jerusalem Cinematheque are among the venues where she has helped bring artists’ work before the public. “These events do not simply appear on a calendar; someone has to make the calls, gather the artists, and see the arrangements through,” she said.

Parker points out that help and advice can come from many sources, including relationships artists establish with printers. “A conversation I had with Jerusalem Fine Art Prints prompted me to think about marketing beyond Israel. If you’re going to reproduce your paintings and drawings to the highest archival quality, you need contacts and guidance that go beyond making the work itself,” she said.

At Li Bama: Making room for women’s talents

Hanna Partouche, a French-born dancer and cultural producer, founded At Li Bama to offer artistic opportunities to other women like herself following a halachic way of life. Rather than wait for an existing institution to provide them, she began producing events herself.

At Li Bama brings together religious women to collaborate in theater, dance, music, and the visual arts. She notes that a singer or dancer looking for a stage has different practical needs from a painter looking for wall space. “But both need people who understand their work and will help it reach an audience,” Partouche said.

Unlike the other two groups, At Li Bama is a multidisciplinary arts organization with its own professional theater rehearsal room in the former National Library building at Hebrew University’s Givat Ram campus. Its roots are in theater, dance, and music; expanding into fine art exhibitions is a relatively new direction, opening opportunities for painters, photographers, and other visual artists to develop professionally alongside women who share a devoted Torah way of life. Visual art exhibitions are coordinated with photographer Esther Lasry.

Lasry’s bird photographs stretch the way we can think about halachic art. “Contemplating nature deepens our faith and awakens our gratitude in Hashem,” she explains. One can almost hear Lasry’s migrating birds: one moment a noisy gathering, then another, the stillness just before dawn, when you could hear a pin drop in the Hula Valley in northern Israel.

The visual artists associated with At Li Bama work in many forms. Among them is Raquel Sanchez, whose intuitive, atmospheric landscapes have earned recognition in the Israeli art world. Sanchez’s Redemption depicts a moonlit sea with a powerful sense of both movement and comfort. Ann Ruth Facktorovich’s paper collage, What Connects Us, is an assembly of family photographs, writing, and fragments of memory. Their work sits alongside the organization’s performances and productions, offering visitors a sense of just how varied its artistic community is.

That range matters to an audience, Partouche points out. Someone who attends a performance may discover a photographer or painter through the same organization; an exhibition visitor may become curious about its theater and dance productions. For artists, meeting women from other disciplines can open unexpected collaborations. “I want artists to develop professionally as well as creatively. Meetings address subjects that can be difficult to master alone, such as how to price work, promote an event, understand copyright, and make useful contacts. The organization is also working to strengthen relationships with cultural and municipal institutions.”

Partouche is equally passionate about what professional recognition means. “If we do art for ourselves, it’s good,” she said. “But a professional is when you have an audience.” She recalls taking a theater production to a very haredi community where some women were seeing live theater for the first time. They arrived with popcorn and chocolates, expecting something like a movie, and afterward asked her to bring more performances.

She challenges the impression that haredi women spend their days at home baking challah. “They are very active. They go out. They do things,” she said. Partouche believes that when women take time to attend a show and enjoy art, they return home feeling better about themselves, and their families benefit too.

For Partouche, religious observance and creativity are not competing demands. “We believe women can bring spirit to their art through halacha,” she said. “I think it brings kedusha [sanctity].” Her motto is “Think positive. Act.”

Partouche adds that the work also has a spiritual purpose: “My purpose is to bring geula,” she said, referring to redemption. “The merit of the woman brings the geula, and this is my belief. This is what I do.”

There is a useful lesson here for artists who are waiting until they have a complete portfolio, the right contact, or an ideal exhibition space. None of these initiatives began with every resource in place. They grew because someone made a first approach, invited others in, and kept going. The next step for a hesitant artist may be as intuitive as contacting one of the organizers, attending a meeting, making new friends, and getting inspired.

Liane Wakabayashi is a Haifa-based writer, artist, and founder of Genesis Art Workshops, established in Japan in 2000 and in Israel in 2017. For details about Genesis Art, see: www.genesiscards.com

Learn more

Greater Baka Artists’ Community: Following its November 1 inaugural exhibition, the group is planning a second three-hour show on Sunday, December 13, from 6 to 9 p.m., exploring Hebrew letters, sacred language, and connections to

Judaism. Artists living in Greater Baka – including Baka, Talpiot, Arnona, Abu Tor, Katamon, the Greek Colony, and Talbiyeh – can inquire about submitting work by WhatsApp to Rikki Rose Horowitz at 053-467-0768.

For artists’ inquiries about joining future exhibitions, contact Horowitz. For general information about the Baka Community

Council artists’ group, contact Arielle Scemama: 054-204-8476 or Anat Chaskalovic: 054-662-6245.

To join the Jerusalem Artists Circle, a network of 700 artists, photographers, and art lovers: Facebook.com/groups/JerusalemArtistsCircle.  

At Li Bama is located in The Social Space (Floor -1), Old National Library (Building 11), Hebrew University, Givat Ram, Jerusalem. It offers professional membership to women 18 or older with relevant artistic education or at least five years’ experience. For more details about events and current membership requirements: 

www.atlibama.org | 050-642-2119 | atlibama@gmail.com 
– L.W.

This post was originally published on here. 

US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that Stephen Miller, 41, would replace Susie Wiles as White House chief of staff, following the Republican defeat in the midterm elections and the loss of both chambers of Congress.

Trump announced Miller’s appointment on Friday after Republicans lost both chambers of Congress, elevating the hardline immigration architect to one of Washington’s most powerful positions.

The appointment, which takes effect on Monday, signals a political choice: Rather than moderate his policies after the electoral setback, Trump is promoting one of his most uncompromising architects.

In 2002, a 16-year-old high school student took the stage at his school in Santa Monica, California, and stood before his classmates. “I’m the only one here willing to say and do things that no one else would dare,” he declared.

He then asked why students were required to pick up their own trash when the school employed janitors who were paid to do precisely that. His remarks sparked an uproar, and they removed him from the stage shortly afterward.

Nearly a quarter of a century later, that teenager, Stephen Miller, is poised to become one of the most powerful figures in the United States.

Miller is not simply another adviser seeking to please Trump. Over the past decade, he has become one of the few people who can translate the president’s political instincts into executive orders, operational directives, and government policy.

Now, he will also be the man deciding who gets access to the Oval Office, which issues reach the president’s desk, and how the White House operates.

From a liberal California high school to the top of a Republican administration

Miller’s story begins in a place few would have expected to produce one of the leading symbols of the American Right.

He was born and raised in Santa Monica, a liberal city on the Pacific coast, in a Jewish family with Democratic roots. Yet, even as a teenager, he developed distinctly conservative views and clashed with teachers and fellow students over immigration, multiculturalism, and political correctness.

He began appearing on conservative radio programs, criticized the use of Spanish at school, and argued that the education system was imposing a liberal worldview on its students. Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, his opposition to what he described as anti-Americanism in educational institutions intensified.

He later became close to conservative activist David Horowitz, who had himself moved from the radical Left to the Right.

Miller continued to stir controversy at Duke University, where he studied. He gained national attention when he defended members of the university’s lacrosse team who were accused of rape in a case that rocked the campus in 2006.

The charges were subsequently dropped, and Miller, who appeared on television to defend the players, began establishing a reputation as a fighter against the liberal establishment.

After graduating, he moved to Washington, working for Republican members of Congress and later for Alabama senator Jeff Sessions, who was considered one of the most prominent opponents of illegal immigration.

It was there that Miller’s worldview took shape, with immigration seen not merely as a matter of law enforcement but as a question concerning the national and cultural identity of the United States.

When Trump launched his presidential campaign in 2015, Miller found a candidate who openly expressed ideas he had long believed in. He joined the campaign, became one of Trump’s leading speechwriters, and helped shape his anti-immigration messaging and “America First” ideology.

Architect of immigration policy becomes one of Trump’s closest allies

During Trump’s first term, Miller was involved in shaping some of the administration’s most controversial measures: restrictions on entry from Muslim-majority countries, reductions in refugee admissions programs, and the policy that led to children being separated from their parents at the Mexican border.

The measures drew fierce criticism and legal challenges but strengthened Miller’s standing among supporters of strict immigration enforcement.

Unlike many advisers who parted ways with Trump following his defeat in the 2020 election, Miller remained by his side.

During Joe Biden’s presidency, he co-founded the legal organization America First Legal, which pursued legal challenges against policies introduced by the Democratic administration, while maintaining close ties with the former president.

When Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, Miller was appointed deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser. This time, he was not content merely to formulate ideas. He was directly involved in implementing them.

In May 2025, Axios reported that Miller and then-homeland security secretary Kristi Noem had demanded that senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials meet a target of at least 3,000 arrests a day, roughly three times the rate at the beginning of Trump’s second term.

The policy led to widespread raids in American cities and confrontations between armed immigration agents and residents and protesters.

Miller was also involved in efforts to restrict legal immigration pathways, impose limitations on asylum, and change the constitutional interpretation that grants American citizenship to people born on US soil.

But his influence has long since extended beyond immigration.

He has also played a central role in the administration’s battles with universities, efforts to eliminate diversity and inclusion programs, and the promotion of a vision that grants broader powers to the executive branch.

When the courts blocked administration measures, Miller did not hesitate to confront them as well.

After judges struck down some of Trump’s import tariffs, he described the ruling as a “judicial coup.” On other occasions, he attacked judges as Marxists and communists.

In an interview with Bloomberg in January 2026, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich described Miller’s standing as nearly equivalent to that of a cabinet secretary.

According to Gingrich, Trump views him as someone capable of performing “six or seven different jobs.”

Beyond immigration: Influence extending into foreign policy

Indeed, Miller has begun expanding his involvement in foreign policy and national security.

He participated in discussions concerning the American operation in Venezuela and the fight against drug cartels in Latin America.

When Trump raised the possibility of taking control of Greenland, Miller articulated a worldview in which international relations are ultimately determined by force.

“We live in a world where you can talk all you want about international niceties,” he said in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper.

“But in the real world, Jake, force, power, and the use of force are what govern. Those are the iron laws of the world and have been since the beginning of time.”

Against the backdrop of that worldview, a New York Times report is particularly noteworthy.

According to the report, one of the arguments Miller made in favor of his appointment as chief of staff was the need to bring the war in Iran to an end.

According to people who heard his remarks, Miller explained that some of Trump’s core supporters viewed the campaign as a betrayal of his promises to avoid prolonged wars in the Middle East.

The report does not necessarily indicate a change in Miller’s fundamental position on the use of military force. It does, however, illustrate how closely he monitors the sentiments of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement and the political dangers facing Trump.

His Jewish family and criticism from within

Miller’s Jewish identity occupies a distinctive place in his story.

He is married to Katie Miller, who is also Jewish and has held positions in the Trump administration.

The couple married in 2020 in a ceremony officiated by Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone, who later helped advance the Abraham Accords and is now a member of the Board of Peace.

They have three children.

Yet, some of the harshest disagreements over Miller’s policies have emerged within his own family and the Jewish community.

His maternal uncle, David Glosser, published an article in Politico in 2018 accusing his nephew of hypocrisy on immigration.

He recalled that the family’s ancestors had fled persecution in Europe and that one of them, Wolf-Leib Glosser, arrived in the United States in 1903 with just eight dollars in his pocket.

According to his uncle, had Miller’s preferred immigration policies been in place at the time, his family might never have reached America and escaped persecution.

Rabbi Neil Comess-Daniels, who taught Miller as a child at a synagogue in Santa Monica, also sharply criticized him, arguing that his policies contradicted the humanitarian Jewish values he had tried to instill in him.

In 2019, rabbinical organizations affiliated with the Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist movements called for Miller’s dismissal following the publication of his correspondence, which prompted accusations that he had promoted white supremacist ideas.

Miller rejected the criticism and has previously argued that some of the attacks against him stemmed from antisemitism directed at a Jewish administration official.

By contrast, the Republican Jewish Coalition considers him one of Trump’s most important allies.

Following his appointment as chief of staff, the organization’s executive director, Matt Brooks, congratulated him and described him as one of the most influential and effective architects of the MAGA movement.

“He has never wavered in his determined and passionate defense of American sovereignty, freedom, and prosperity,” Brooks said, adding that Miller was the right person to lead the president’s team during the remaining two years of his term.

Among Democrats, however, the reactions were entirely different.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries called Miller a “dangerous xenophobe,” while Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer argued that the appointment proved Trump had learned nothing from the electoral defeat.

Rep. Robert Garcia, who is expected to chair the House Oversight Committee, warned that Democrats would continue investigating Miller’s involvement in deportation policies and advised him to “get a lawyer.”

‘I pledge you my absolute loyalty’

For his part, Miller makes no secret of how he views his new role.

In a speech at Mar-a-Lago following the announcement of his appointment, he delivered what amounted to an almost unconditional declaration of loyalty to the president.

“Without President Trump, the United States would not exist today. This man saved America,” he declared.

“He saved our military from collapse, our economy from destruction, and our border from ruin.”

He then addressed Trump directly.

“It is the greatest honor of my life to be your chief of staff. I pledge to you, Mr. President, my absolute loyalty, my unwavering commitment, and my complete dedication to your success and the success of this country.”

Miller will now face a very different test from those he has encountered throughout his career.

For years, he was the man pushing Trump to fulfill his promises, sometimes through confrontation with other branches of government.

As chief of staff, he will also have to manage the White House, mediate between cabinet members and senior officials, contend with a Democratic-controlled Congress, and maintain the priorities of a president who is not known for organizational discipline.

The major question in Washington is whether a man who has made ideological struggle his life’s work can also become an effective manager, or whether his appointment will turn Trump’s final two years in the White House into a prolonged, head-on confrontation with his political opponents.

Either way, the Jewish boy who stood before students at a liberal California school nearly a quarter of a century ago and promised to say things no one else dared to say now occupies a position in which his words can influence the policies of the world’s most powerful nation.

This post was originally published on here. 

Major League Baseball Hall of Famer Reggie Jackson called out antisemitism in his home state of Philadelphia, comparing it to racism he experienced in the 1960s, in a Saturday post on X/Twitter.

Jackson cited Anti-Defamation League (ADL) data recording 465 antisemitic incidents in Pennsylvania over the course of 2024, including 189 in Philadelphia and 51 in Montgomery County, where his hometown Wyncote is located.

“The numbers show this is not an abstract concern,” Jackson wrote, adding that it made him “angry and ashamed to see hatred tolerated there.”

It is heartbreaking to see antisemitism in my hometown. I was born in Wyncote, near Philadelphia, and it makes me angry and ashamed to see hatred tolerated there. The numbers show this is not an abstract concern. The Anti-Defamation League recorded 465 antisemitic incidents across Pennsylvania in 2024, an 18% increase over 2023. It tracked 189 incidents in Philadelphia and 51 in Montgomery County. These reports include harassment, vandalism, and assault; they are not all classified as crimes. (https://t.co/LNbuEF4lCN, https://t.co/VD98Hg5XEp) Hateful expression harms more than its immediate target. In a 2025 survey of Jewish Americans, 79% said they were concerned about antisemitism, and 52% said they had worried about their personal safety because of their identity. Nearly half reported taking steps to increase their security. A research review also found that exposure to hate is associated with worse psychological well-being, more negative stereotypes, and less trust between groups. (https://t.co/VD98Hg5XEp, https://t.co/YJT6NcR4VF) It takes me back to the racism I experienced in the 1960s: signs throughout the South declaring that Black people could be refused service, along with separate “white” and “colored” signs on bathrooms and drinking fountains,”no niggers”. I remember what that hatred looked and felt like. We cannot accept it in any form, directed at any people. I wish I could be there to stand with those protesting HATE. I am asking elected officials and other leaders in Philadelphia: Where are the clear statements condemning antisemitism? When hateful language is excused or repeated, it can make hostility seem acceptable and deepen fear and division. Leaders should speak plainly and consistently: antisemitism and hate have no place in our communities. What the hell? We have to speak up. Reggie Jackson The Mr. October Guy

— Reggie Jackson (@mroctober) November 7, 2026

Jackson also brought up ADL reports that a majority of Jewish Americans are concerned about antisemitism and their personal safety. 

“Hateful expression harms more than its immediate target,” he wrote. “A research review also found that exposure to hate is associated with worse psychological well-being, more negative stereotypes, and less trust between groups.”

US antisemitism is like American South racism in 1960s, Jackson says

He associated reports of pervasive antisemitism with racism in the American South in the 1960s, mentioning separate bathrooms and drinking fountains, and signs stating that black people could be refused service.

“I remember what that hatred looked and felt like,” he concluded. “We cannot accept it in any form, directed at any people.”

Jackson called for Philadelphia leaders and elected officials to stand up to protest and condemn antisemitism.

“Leaders should speak plainly and consistently,” he said. “Antisemitism and hate have no place in our communities.”

This post was originally published on here. 

President Isaac Herzog announced on Saturday that he would task Yashar party chairman Gadi Eisenkot with forming Israel’s next government, after 67 MKs recommended him for the position, compared with 46 who backed Benjamin Netanyahu and seven who abstained. 

Eisenkot was invited to the President’s Residence on Sunday at 5 p.m. to receive the mandate, but the majority that emerged in support of his nomination remains far from enough to swear in a government.

The disagreements among his potential coalition partners are so deep that Herzog himself sought clarification over the weekend on how Eisenkot intends to overcome them.

Following the round of consultations he held last week, the president conducted additional consultations over the past 24 hours through telephone conversations with several party leaders. He did not speak with everyone: Some observe Shabbat, at least one was unavailable, and further conversations with every faction were unnecessary.

The inquiries focused on a practical question: How does Eisenkot intend to establish a stable coalition when Avigdor Liberman rules out a government dependent on Arab parties, the B’Yachad party emphasizes its commitment to a coalition of those who serve, haredi conscription, and equality in sharing the burden, while the haredi parties demand legislation regulating the status of yeshiva students and oppose recruitment targets and sanctions?

The recommendations gave Eisenkot a clear advantage but did not resolve this contradiction. Of the 67 MKs who recommended him, 19 belong to the Arab parties. The Zionist change bloc holds only 48 seats.

To establish a majority government with 61 MKs and the haredi parties, Eisenkot needs both United Torah Judaism’s seven seats and Shas’s six.

However, Shas chairman Arye Deri recommended Netanyahu, and sources in haredi circles say it is hard to imagine Shas even entering coalition negotiations with Eisenkot.

“It was no coincidence that Deri recommended Netanyahu,” haredi sources said.

They stressed that even if United Torah Judaism agrees to begin talks, and even if understandings are reached with the party, an outcome that is neither clear nor guaranteed at this stage, that does not mean Deri will join the effort.

Without Shas, the change bloc and United Torah Judaism would have just 55 MKs.

Between the haredim and the veto

Liberman, for his part, has given Eisenkot his full backing to try to form a government.

The Yisrael Beytenu chairman does not intend to demand a rotation agreement in exchange for his support, either as a condition for recommending Eisenkot or as part of the understandings concerning the next Knesset speaker.

He has also withdrawn his objection in principle to partnering with the haredi parties and agreed to consider compromises on the conscription law based on the framework he proposed in 2018.

Haredi sources say the mutual veto between Liberman and the haredi parties has been lifted on both sides, and that contacts are already taking place between figures in the haredi parties and associates of the Yisrael Beytenu chairman.

According to the sources, the haredi parties have a long history of cooperation with Liberman, and their familiarity with him over the years has created a level of trust that may even exceed the trust they place in Eisenkot.

The alternative route, establishing a minority government with the help of abstentions by the Arab parties, faces firm opposition from Liberman.

The Yisrael Beytenu chairman has made clear that he will not agree to a government established with the support of Ra’am or the Joint List, or even through their abstention.

Sources in haredi circles believe that if Eisenkot pursues this scenario, the haredi parties will vote against a minority government dependent on the Arab parties, and they expect Yisrael Beytenu to do the same.

These are assessments rather than official voting decisions, but they illustrate the difficulty facing Eisenkot. If Liberman maintains his position, abstentions by the Arab parties will not be enough to guarantee the government’s swearing-in.

According to the haredi sources’ assessment, Eisenkot could therefore struggle to form a government through either of the two main options available to him: bringing the haredi parties into a coalition or establishing a minority government.

Eisenkot is not rushing to abandon the possibility of initially forming a national emergency government comprising the change bloc and expanding it later.

On Friday, he published four principles for participation in his government: recognition of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, acceptance of the values of the Declaration of Independence, mandatory military, national, or civilian service, and recognition of Hamas as a terrorist organization alongside a commitment to dismantling its military and governing capabilities.

He also warned against those who would obstruct the establishment of a government for personal reasons.

The statement was intended to define common ground among potential partners, but it still does not answer the question of the conscription law.

The haredi parties want to regulate the status of yeshiva students, while some of the Zionist coalition partners demand substantial haredi enlistment and equality in sharing the burden.

Difficulty is not limited to just Liberman

Naftali Bennett has so far refrained from publicly committing to a framework that would include compromises with the haredi parties.

His party has clarified that his silence should not be interpreted as consent and recalled his commitment to a “revolution of those who serve.”

Meanwhile, Yair Golan reported progress in the talks and meetings between the negotiating teams of the Democrats and Yashar.

Even if understandings are reached among the Zionist parties in the bloc, it will still be necessary to persuade the haredi parties to accept a conscription arrangement and the secular partners to support it.

The question is not merely who will agree to sit around the negotiating table, but what legislation they can all agree to vote for.

Battle for control of the Knesset

Alongside the coalition negotiations, the change bloc plans to begin exercising its power in the Knesset immediately after its swearing-in on Tuesday.

The first move is an attempt to replace Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana.

Liberman prefers Yair Lapid for the position, but no candidate has been agreed upon yet.

The bloc is also examining the establishment of special committees, advancing a state commission of inquiry into the events of October 7, and repealing laws promoted by Netanyahu’s coalition.

A vote to replace Ohana on the day of the Knesset’s swearing-in is not guaranteed, and even a majority in favor of replacing him would not necessarily be enough to form a government.

Nevertheless, replacing the Knesset speaker would allow the change bloc to influence the parliamentary agenda even before a solution to the coalition crisis is found.

If Eisenkot fails, Liberman sees himself as a suitable and experienced candidate for the next attempt, although the mandate would not automatically pass to him.

For now, the ball is in Eisenkot’s court. He is expected to receive the mandate on Sunday and will then have to turn 67 recommendations into agreements among parties that have yet to agree on what kind of government they are prepared to establish.

This post was originally published on here. 

Former prime minister and defense minister David Ben-Gurion wished the Gaza Strip would “sink into the sea” and warned that future wars would bring devastating civilian casualties, according to documents released by the IDF and the Defense Establishment Archive to mark the 70th anniversary of the 1956 Sinai Campaign, known as “Operation Kadesh” or the Suez Crisis.

The documents also reveal Ben-Gurion’s warning about the next war, primarily his fears that “Tel Aviv will be bombed, Haifa will be bombed, and people will be killed. Not combatants, women, children.”

Ben-Gurion made his remarks about Gaza during a cabinet meeting on October 28, 1956, on the eve of Operation Kadesh. Months later, on April 4, 1957, he repeated them at a conference of senior officers following the IDF’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula.

“The Gaza Strip is an ’embarrassing’ objective […] We have to take it. It stands in our way. If I believed in miracles, I would wish it would sink into the sea,” he said.

‘Tel Aviv will be bombed, Haifa will be bombed’: Warning about the next war

In another newly released document, Ben-Gurion warned IDF commanders against relying on the success of Operation Kadesh as an indication of what to expect in a future war. He said that although the IDF had managed to limit casualties during the Sinai Campaign, there was no reason to assume the same would be true in the future.

Ben-Gurion stressed that another war could inflict severe damage on the civilian home front and urged commanders: “And do not draw an analogy […] from the Sinai Campaign to the next war.”

‘This terror would have destroyed us’: Opposition to controlling Gaza

In his remarks about the Gaza Strip, Ben-Gurion addressed the difficulties involved in maintaining Israeli control over the territory.

“We know that the Gaza Strip is a problem under any administration, whatever that administration may be, whether it is an Israeli administration, or an Israeli administration plus the UN, or a UN administration without Israel,” he said.

According to Ben-Gurion, the worst possible outcome would have been Egyptian rule over the Strip, but continued Israeli control could also have come at a heavy cost.

“But it was clear that our remaining in Gaza, after the world had ostracized us, and there would be terror there that we would have to suppress, was beyond Israel’s capabilities and vital needs. This terror would have destroyed us.”

Ben-Gurion also addressed the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip and the moral cost of continuing to control the territory.

“And therefore, from the very beginning, I strongly opposed those who demanded the annexation of Gaza. What Israel lacks is not another 300,000 Arabs, Arab citizens, and ones like these,” he said.

He went on to warn that prolonged control over the Strip could harm Israel in ways that extended beyond the military sphere.

“And perhaps this would have destroyed us, not militarily, but morally […] If, in the eyes of the people and in the eyes of the world, we lose our moral right to exist, Israel cannot exist.”

Shimon Peres: ‘Our victory in battle does not necessarily mean the last battle’

Among the newly released documents is a handwritten account by Shimon Peres, who was serving as director-general of the Defense Ministry at the time.

Peres described Ben-Gurion as having made two seemingly contradictory decisions: first to go to war and then to withdraw.

“He also explained to us that wars would not solve the problem of Arab-Israeli relations, since our victory in battle does not necessarily mean the last battle, but an Arab victory could be the final victory,” Peres wrote.

Rescue of Jews from Egypt and thousands of rare photographs

The materials also include documents concerning Operation Honio, during which an Israeli team rescued 65 Jews from Port Said, Egypt, in November 1956.

In a report submitted to the head of Military Intelligence, Lt.-Col. Aryeh Eliav wrote: “My role within the team was to rescue Jews and bring them to Israel.”

Additional documents detail the activities of the Israel Air Force during the war, including a plan to attack Egyptian airfields that was never carried out, accounts of an accidental attack on IDF troops, and records of the attack on the Egyptian destroyer Ibrahim el-Awal.

The IDF and the Defense Establishment Archive at the Defense Ministry are publishing the documents on a dedicated website to mark the 70th anniversary of Operation Kadesh.

The website brings together more than 4,500 photographs, documents, and maps, many of which have never previously been made available to the public.

It also includes information on 149 commanders who began their military careers during Israel’s War of Independence and later became part of the IDF’s founding command leadership.

This post was originally published on here. 

At least 33 people were killed and 39 wounded in what the Houthi-run Saba news agency said were Saudi airstrikes on a village near Yemen‘s capital Sanaa on Saturday, in one of the deadliest reported attacks since fighting between Saudi Arabia and the Iran-aligned group resumed in July.

Reuters could not independently verify the account. Saudi Arabia’s Center for International Communication said it was investigating the report. 

The renewed fighting between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis has shattered a 2022 UN-brokered truce that largely halted attacks between the Saudi-led coalition and the group, which controls Sanaa. The Houthis have since launched missile and drone attacks on Saudi airports and oil facilities, while Riyadh has carried out airstrikes in Yemen in support of its Yemeni allies.

The ministry said the strikes hit homes in the town of Bani Hushaysh, a Houthi stronghold east of Sanaa, and that most of those killed were women and children.

Abdul-Aziz al-Dailami, director of Sehatuna Hospital in Sanaa, said many victims remained trapped under the rubble, including first responders.

“The strikes keep coming. Just as rescuers arrive, another strike hits. We have even lost some of our own medical responders, who have been martyred,” he told Reuters.

“We received a number of wounded individuals in very critical condition, with injuries to the head, chest and legs, as well as fractures,” al-Dailami added.

The fighting, a spillover from the wider US-Iran conflict, has revived a complex 12-year war in Yemen that has caused one of the worst humanitarian crises globally and fragmented the Arab world’s most impoverished country.

The number of people displaced since the latest round of fighting began has climbed to more than 200,000, the International Organization for Migration said in October.

Saudi Arabia sounds all-clear after Houthi missile attacks

Saudi Arabia‘s civil defense on Sunday lifted alerts in several areas of the kingdom’s oil-rich Eastern Province, including Dhahran, home to the headquarters of oil major Saudi Aramco, shortly after warning of potential danger.

The all-clear also applies to Dammam, Abqaiq, and Al-Ahsa governorate, the civil defense said.

The Eastern Province contains the majority of the kingdom’s oil and gas reserves as well as Saudi Aramco’s 2222.SE headquarters, which suffered extensive damage in an attack in October.

Shortly after the all-clear, the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen said it had intercepted a ballistic missile launched by the Yemeni Iran-allied Houthi group towards the Eastern region.

Houthis launch missiles toward Riyadh, Saudis say

Later, multiple loud booms were heard in the Saudi capital Riyadh shortly after Civil Defense issued an early-warning alert of a potential threat, a Reuters witness said.

Saudi Civil Defense later said the danger had passed.

Later, the coalition said it intercepted and destroyed two cruise missiles in Riyadh and the southern region.

The Houthis have been firing ballistic missiles and drones at Saudi airports, ports, and oil installations, turning US ally Saudi Arabia into a pressure point in a war that began with the US and Israel attacking Iran in February.

This post was originally published on here. 

About 20 Israel Nature and Parks Authority (INPA) conservation specialists gathered at Beit Alfa National Park in northern Israel earlier this week to preserve the 1,500-year-old mosaic floor of the site’s ancient synagogue.

The team, led by INPA’s Archaeology and Heritage Division, was made up of specialists from across Israel. 

Together, they worked to gently clean the mosaic’s surface, stabilize loose stones, and reinforce vulnerable areas, completing a task that would have otherwise taken several days.

Gaps between the stones were refilled with binding materials compatible with the mosaic’s original materials, a technique known as repointing.

Before and after the work was completed, the INPA documented the condition of the mosaic as part of its ongoing monitoring of the piece’s conservation and to aid in the planning of future maintenance.

What is the Beit Alfa mosaic?

Beit Alfa’s ancient synagogue was built during the Byzantine period, at the end of the fifth century CE, approximately 1,500 years ago. It is made up of a courtyard, corridor, rectangular main hall with the mosaic floor, a second-story balcony and an additional room.

An Aramaic mosaic inscription, most of whose right-hand section is missing, describes the floor as being laid during the “reign of Justinian,” thought to refer to Emperor Justinian I, who ruled from 527 to 565.

A second inscription, in Greek, names the mosaic’s artists, Marianus and his son Hanina. The two are also mentioned by name in an inscription at the synagogue in Beit She’an, suggesting that their workshop was located there. 

The mosaic floor is split into three colorful panels, depicting the Ark of the Covenant, the zodiac and the biblical story of the Binding of Isaac.

The 12 signs of the zodiac appear in Hebrew, surrounding the Greek sun god, Helios, as he drives his chariot across the sky. A square frame surrounds the zodiac wheel, with a female figure in each of its four corners representing one of the four seasons.

The third panel features a depiction of the Binding of Isaac, showing a bearded Abraham holding a knife over his son – both identified by their Hebrew names. Above them is a hand, next to which are the words of God’s biblical command to Abraham, “Do not lay your hand,” are laid.

The upper panel depicts the Ark of the Covenant, topped by a pediment containing a shell motif and birds, while seven-branched menorahs are depicted on both sides of its sides.

The panel also features a shofar, a fire pan, an etrog, lulav, and two lions.

Professor Eleazar Lipa Sukenik, an archaeologist from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, uncovered the mosaic floor in 1928. Sukenik, notably, was among the first to recognize the importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls and aided the Israeli government in its efforts to purchase them. 

His son, Yigael Yadin, became the IDF’s second chief of staff and a household name in Israeli archaeology, known for his work on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Masada, Tel Megiddo, and many other significant locations.

Preserving mosaic for future generations

“When standing in front of the mosaic floor at Beit Alfa, it is difficult not to be amazed by its beauty,” said INPA Archaeology and Heritage Division Director Orit Bortnik. “More than 800,000 tiny mosaic stones, laid side by side approximately 1,500 years ago, come together to tell a fascinating story about the people who lived here and the artists who created this extraordinary work.

“Our responsibility is to preserve this mosaic so that future generations can be moved by it just as we are. This special conservation operation is an excellent example of what can be achieved when dedicated professionals join forces.”

“In a single day, thanks to the participation of conservation specialists from across the country, we managed to carry out complex and significant work,” Bortnik said. “I am proud of the Israel Nature and Parks Authority’s conservation teams, who work every day to protect the heritage treasures that belong to us all.

“This is also a wonderful opportunity to invite you to visit Beit Alfa, get up close to this remarkable mosaic, and discover firsthand just how much beauty and how many stories can be hidden within tiny stones.”

This post was originally published on here. 

The next world order will not begin with a peace treaty or a handshake on the White House lawn. It is already being built – in data centers, undersea cables, chip factories and the code that runs power grids, hospitals and armies. The only question is who will write its rules.

In my previous article, “Who writes the code of the new world?,” I argued that software has become part of the strategic architecture of civilization. Here I go a step further: the democracies that build this architecture must also govern it. And the United States and Israel are best placed to lead.

Kissinger’s unfinished chapter

Henry Kissinger spent his life on one problem: how to make power legitimate enough to be stable. In World Order, he warned that cyberspace had outpaced any shared doctrine, leaving states with powerful capabilities and no agreed limits. 

In his final books on artificial intelligence, The Age of AI and Genesis, he went further: machines that act faster than human judgment could upend deterrence itself.

His central lesson still holds. Order rests on two pillars: a balance of power and a shared sense of legitimacy. Remove either, and the system slides into chaos or coercion.

What Kissinger’s century could not fully foresee is a world in which a nation can lose sovereignty without losing territory. A government can be recognized at the United Nations yet depend on foreign clouds, foreign chips, and foreign algorithms it cannot inspect. 

Its power grid can be switched off from a continent away. In the cyber age, the balance of power is measured not only in divisions and warheads, but in who controls the infrastructure everyone else relies on.

That is why the new order needs a core: trusted democracies with both the capability and the credibility to set the rules.

The partnership that already works

No relationship is better suited to that role than the one between Washington and Jerusalem.

America brings scale: leadership in advanced computing, chip design, AI, space, and a global network of alliances. Israel brings something rarer: a nation that must defend itself every day, in every domain, from rockets to ransomware. 

Its cyber sector, born of necessity and refined under fire, is among the most innovative on Earth. Google’s $32 billion agreement to acquire the Israeli cloud-security company Wiz was not charity. It was recognition.

Last year’s war with Iran showed what this alliance means in practice. Israeli intelligence and American power, acting together, set back a nuclear program that threatened the entire region. Missile defenses developed jointly by the two countries protected civilians from hundreds of ballistic missiles. And the war was fought in cyberspace too, with attacks on banks, infrastructure, and information systems. The battlefield now runs through servers as well as skies.

This is no longer only a bilateral asset. When Germany bought Israel’s Arrow 3 system to protect European skies, Europe acknowledged that Israeli defense innovation is part of its own security. Cyber should be next.

From alliance to architecture

The opportunity now is to turn US-Israeli cooperation into a wider architecture: a trusted technology alliance open to European democracies and Abraham Accords partners. Three steps would make it real.

First, joint defense of critical infrastructure. Power grids, ports, hospitals and financial systems need shared early warning, threat intelligence and rapid response, the cyber equivalent of integrated air defense.

Second, trusted supply chains. Democracies cannot defend themselves on hardware and software built by authoritarian rivals. The chips, clouds, and AI systems that underpin national security should come from partners who share values and accept accountability.

Third, rules for AI in security. Kissinger’s final warning was that AI could compress decisions beyond human control. Washington and Jerusalem, which field some of the world’s most advanced military AI, have the standing and the responsibility to set standards for meaningful human oversight before adversaries set them by default.

The Eastern Mediterranean and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor show the geography of this architecture: energy, data cables, and trade routes linking the Gulf, Israel, Cyprus, Greece, and Europe. Whoever secures these networks will shape the region’s future more than whoever fires the most missiles.

The alternative is not a vacuum. China offers digital infrastructure with dependence built in. Russia has shown how cyberattacks and disinformation complement tanks. Iran uses proxies, drones, and hackers to project power far beyond the reach of its economy.

These regimes are not a single bloc, but they share a goal: an order in which rules are optional and dependency is a tool of coercion. The democratic answer cannot be rhetoric. It must be capability combined with legitimacy – precisely Kissinger’s formula.

Europe’s choice

Europe has led on regulation, from data protection to the AI Act. But regulation without capability is a rulebook for a game others are playing. Europe still depends on foreign clouds, foreign chips, and, increasingly, foreign defense technology.

Strategic autonomy cannot mean isolation. The smarter choice is deeper integration with the American and Israeli ecosystems, partnerships that strengthen European sovereignty rather than replace it.

I write from Sarajevo, a city that learned the hard way what happens when international guarantees fail. Here, security is not an abstraction. It means a hospital that keeps working, electricity that stays on, and institutions that do not abandon their citizens.

Smaller democracies, including those of the Western Balkans, feel the new vulnerability most acutely. They are asked to meet Western standards while depending on technology they cannot verify or replace. A US-Israeli-led alliance that shares knowledge and builds local capacity, rather than creating new dependencies, would earn something no adversary can buy: genuine trust.

The table is being set

Kissinger believed lasting order is built by those who combine strength with a vision others can accept. The cyber order will be no different.

The US and Israel have the strength, and they have proven the partnership. Now they must offer the vision: an order in which democracies protect not only their borders, but the systems on which free societies depend.

The table of the new world order is being set right now. If America and Israel do not lead in writing its rules, others will – and they will not write them for freedom.

The writer is a cybersecurity strategist and expert in artificial intelligence, data governance, and international security, based in Sarajevo.

This post was originally published on here. 

Jewish American leader J. David Heller was appointed Chairman of The Jewish Agency for Israel’s Board of Governors last week, succeeding former chairman Mark Wilf, the agency announced.

“David brings a deep love for the Jewish people and extensive leadership experience to The Jewish Agency,” Maj.-Gen. (Res.) Doron Almog, Chairman of the Executive of The Jewish Agency, said.

“I look forward to working closely with him as we continue to help communities rebuild, and give people the support they need to look toward the future with hope.”

Almog also thanked Wilf for his “compassionate and steady leadership,” which had helped the organization “stand beside the people of Israel and Jewish communities worldwide during an extraordinarily difficult period.”

Heller previously served as National Campaign Chair of The Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA) and Chair of the Jewish Federation of Cleveland. 

He was also appointed to the United States Holocaust Memorial Council by former US president Barack Obama, serves on numerous boards for companies, foundations, and Jewish institutions, and is president, CEO, and co-founder of The NRP Group.

Partnership between Israel, international Jewry is vital, Heller says

“I am deeply honored to take on this responsibility at a time when the partnership between Israel and global Jewish communities is so vital to our shared future,” Heller said about his most recent appointment.

“Behind every effort to rebuild communities and strengthen Jewish life are people who need to know that they are not alone. I look forward to working with our partners and fellow Board of Governors members to help families recover, create opportunities in Israel’s north and south, and deepen the connections that unite us as one Jewish people.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Iran executed three men on Sunday after they were convicted of carrying out operations for Israel and the US and taking part in armed unrest during anti-government protests in January, state media reported.

The executions are the latest in a series Iran has carried out in recent months over the January protests, including of people accused of links to Israel and the US.

Hassan Dioband, Hamid Kazemi, and Reza Zanganeh were accused of using firearms, grenades, and Molotov cocktails, setting fire to public facilities and damaging an electricity substation in the city of Karaj, causing power outages in some areas, according to the judiciary.

Ten others arrested in Iran, accused of participating in ‘unrest’

The judiciary said Dioband was arrested on January 11 after investigations identified him as a suspect in attacks on public property and incitement to violence.

Ten others accused of participating in the unrest under his supervision were subsequently arrested.

The three were sentenced to death and ordered to have their assets confiscated. Their executions were carried out after the Supreme Court upheld their sentences, while the other defendants received prison terms of 5 to 10 years.

This post was originally published on here.