All News (Page 90)

The Iran conflict and the Russian war against Ukraine appear to be converging more in recent weeks. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was in Washington on July 28 alongside Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They held separate meetings with US President Donald Trump.

They also met briefly because they were both in the city for the funeral of US Senator Lindsey Graham. The short meeting, in public with many people around them, was not conducive to conducting real diplomacy. However, it might lead to an opening.

Iran has long backed Russia via exporting Shahed drones to Moscow. Moscow has also backed Iran in the past, helping it with nuclear technology and also supporting it diplomatically. While the Iran-Russia partnership was always clear, the countries that suffer their aggression have not always gotten along. Israel and Ukraine have not been working closely in the past.

It is not clear why Jerusalem has had a cold shoulder for Ukraine over the years. One reason in the past was claims that Israel needed deconfliction with Russia in Syria. Russia backed the Syrian Assad regime. Russia intervened in Syria in 2015 and sent more troops and warplanes. Israel was carrying out airstrikes on Iranian entrenchment during the Assad era, an operation called the Campaign Between the Wars.

Once the Russian invasion of Ukraine began in 2022, it was clear that Ukraine and Israel had many things in common. However, Jerusalem was cautious about angering Moscow. In those years, the Biden administration was in charge, and Jerusalem also had skepticism about US policy. As such, Israel was hedging. Other countries that are US friends and partners also hedged, such as Saudi Arabia and India.

After October 7, it became less clear why Israel was being so skeptical. Hamas has been hosted in Moscow. Iran backs Russia, and Russia is friends with Iran. Russia and Iran backed the Assad regime. During the Assad era, Hezbollah became massively more powerful. Therefore, there was every reason for Israel and Ukraine to see that they have common foes. However, even in 2023, 2024, and after, there was no real warming in relations.

In fact, relations remained cold. As recently as April 2026, there was controversy about a ship allegedly carrying stolen Ukrainian grain heading for Israel. Ukraine asked Israel to seize the vessel.

Gideon Sa’ar speaks to Ukraine’s foreign minister

Now things may be changing. Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar posted about a call with his Ukrainian counterpart. “I spoke today with my Ukrainian counterpart, Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha,” the Israeli minister noted. “We discussed the challenges facing our nations, including the threat posed by Iran. I expressed my deep sorrow over the heavy losses suffered by the Ukrainian people in the war and wished a full recovery to all those injured and suffering.”

“I invited Minister Sybiha to visit Israel as we mark 35 years of diplomatic relations between our countries. Israel and Ukraine are friends, and I look forward to further deepening our cooperation, including through the establishment of new education centers in Ukrainian hospitals.” Sa’ar added. “I look forward to continuing our close dialogue and strengthening the friendship between our countries.”

Sybiha replied, thanking Sa’ar and saying “invitation accepted.”

“During our call, I informed about Russia’s escalation of terror against civilian vessels and freedom of navigation in the Black Sea and their implications for global food security, including for Israel as an importer,” Sybiha noted. “I also updated my counterpart about the preparations for commemorative events dedicated to the 85th tragic anniversary of the Babyn Yar massacre.”

Volodymyr Zelensky was born in 1978 and rose to prominence in Ukraine as an actor and comedian before entering politics. Zelensky entered politics and eventually ran for president in 2019 on an anti-corruption and reform platform. He defeated incumbent Petro Poroshenko with more than 70 percent of the vote.

Zelensky initially sought dialogue with Russia and a resolution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine, where Russian-backed separatists had been fighting Ukrainian forces since 2014. Russia had also annexed Crimea. However, tensions with Moscow continued. Russia massed forces near Ukraine’s border in 2021 and early 2022 launched an invasion.

While some Western powers evacuated staff from Kyiv in expectation that the capital would fall, Zelensky remained in Kyiv as Russian forces advanced toward the capital. Soon Zelensky was seen as a hero in the West, standing firm against the Russians. Over the last years, the front has stabilized, and Ukraine has become an innovator in defense technology.

Israel, Ukraine share expertise in defense technology

Like Israel, which is also a powerful defense technology country, Ukraine is now helping the West learn lessons about the future of modern war. Western countries are hungry for Israeli and Ukrainian technology.

While many Israeli defense companies and officials have looked to Ukraine for lessons. The official line in Jerusalem has remained cold toward Ukraine. There have been no defense ties or any clear public work on learning from the two wars. However, the wars are increasingly linked. Ukraine struck a ship in the Caspian Sea recently that was apparently transporting military items to Russia. Iran has slammed Ukraine and threatened Kyiv.

Over the years, there was a quiet anti-Ukraine agenda in some Western circles. This tended to be an agenda that flirted with the far-right and far-left. It tapped into social media and influencers. However, things have also changed on this front. An ecosystem in social media that may have once pushed anti-Ukraine messaging and sought to divide Israel and Ukraine has shifted.

The anti-Ukraine agenda that one once saw in some Israeli circles, where Ukraine was accused of being anti-Israel in its UN votes, appears to have diminished. No longer are there voices that seem to think Israel should be working with Moscow or China. Some of this shift has likely occurred also as a result of the fall of Hungary’s Viktor Orban, who was sympathetic to Russia and who also posed as pro-Israel.

What may happen next? If Israel and Ukraine can grow closer, this will help the US and Western allies. The US increasingly sees Ukraine as a winner. The Trump administration appears increasingly supportive of Ukraine because Kyiv has shown it can fight alone and win against the Russians, carrying out deep strikes inside Russia. Ukraine doesn’t need America to fight for it, and this meshes well with President Trump’s doctrine and agenda.

There is a likelihood that lessons from Ukraine will be felt in the US defense industry and that Ukrainian defense technology will influence US and European defense investment decisions. Israel doesn’t want to get left behind or seen as the odd-man-out in this scenario. Israeli defense companies already have close ties with US defense companies. As such, with Ukraine part of the story, there could be momentum towards cooperation on different levels.

It remains to be seen what may happen. Zelensky’s ability to navigate Ukraine through the last several years has been impressive. Israel has also faced a difficult multi-front war. Both countries have seen civilians attacked by Iranian drones. Both Russia and the Iranian-backed axis of proxies have attacked civilians.

After years of war, these two wars that now symbolize the early 21st century may be trending together, with the West seeing them as linked in the struggle for the world order. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Oscar-winning American actor Jared Leto on Wednesday denied sexual misconduct claims made by four women who told the BBC that the Hollywood star assaulted them when they were teenagers.

“I have never sexually assaulted anyone in my entire life. These claims are absolutely and categorically false,” Leto said in a statement.

In a documentary called “Jared Leto: Hollywood’s Dark Secret,” four women described encounters that took place between 2002 and 2016 when the actor was in his 30s or 40s. He is now 54.

In the documentary, one of the women said she was sexually assaulted in a motel bathroom when she was 17. Another said the Hollywood star threatened her with sexual assault when she was 19.

A third said she had underage sex with the star in California when she was 17, which would be classified as statutory rape. A fourth said Leto made sexually explicit phone calls to her when she was 16.

Four others described “strange and often very sexual phone calls from Leto,” the BBC said.

BBC corroborated accusations with pictures, messages

The outlet said it had corroborated a number of the women’s accounts with friends and family who were told about the encounters with Leto at the time. “In some cases, we have also seen pictures and messages that support the women’s accounts,” the BBC said.

In 2025, nine women accused Leto of sexual impropriety in a piece by US outlet Air Mail.

Leto won an Academy Award for best supporting actor for his role as an HIV-positive transgender woman in the 2013 film “Dallas Buyers Club.” He also appeared in “House of Gucci,” “Suicide Squad,” and “Morbius.”

Outside of acting, Leto is the lead singer for the alternative rock band Thirty Seconds to Mars.

This post was originally published on here. 

The United States is considering delaying, or even blocking, French President Emmanuel Macron’s choice for France‘s next ambassador to Washington following public French criticism of the country’s human rights record, according to four sources.

While the sources said no decision has yet been taken, two said France’s criticism – delivered in a social media post by France’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva – had sparked genuine anger among some senior officials in US President Donald Trump’s administration. Two other sources said officials were hoping to de-escalate tensions with France.

“The United States is very disappointed in the irresponsible and disrespectful rhetoric from the French,” a State Department official said. “We are responding appropriately to their comments.”

A US move to delay or reject Macron’s nominee would be highly unusual and could widen the fissure between the allies, who have recently clashed over tariffs and the Iran war.

Macron has filed the relevant paperwork for Aurelien Lechevallier, a former Elysee aide who is currently Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot’s chief of staff, to become France’s next ambassador to Washington. France had hoped to have him installed by September, one of the sources said.

But the process has run into difficulties since a post on X/Twitter by France’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva.

In the post on Saturday, the mission criticized Washington for joining Russia, North Korea and seven other countries in voting against a proposal to extend the mandate of Volker Turk, the UN human rights chief, for another four years.

“The US used to be a beacon of human rights. Not anymore,” the French mission wrote. “The world no longer listens to it.”

One of the sources said the post had been reviewed and approved through official channels, dismissing suggestions that it was the work of a junior staffer acting independently.

Tensions flared further on Monday when the US delegation walked out as France addressed a United Nations Security Council meeting on Ukraine, accusing its ally of “disingenuous grandstanding.”

France’s support for the renewal of Turk’s mandate “does not preclude close dialogue with the United States,” a French diplomatic official said.

“Differences of opinion regarding a vote do not call into question the quality of our relationship or our ability to work together,” the official added.

US-France relationship souring under Trump, Macron

France has been a longstanding US ally, but relations have soured during Trump’s second term. While Trump and Macron speak regularly, that hasn’t stopped the US president from targeting France with tariffs, accusing European governments of suppressing right-wing voices, and threatening NATO allies over defense spending and Greenland.

Even before the latest spat, Washington had been riled by Barrot’s public comments about the US government, one of the sources said.

Earlier this month, Barrot posted on X/Twitter about a State Department program that offered funding of up to $3 million to groups promoting “civilizational self-confidence” in Europe.

The funding was offered by the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL), whose officials offered to support far-right leader Marine Le Pen last year during her embezzlement trial.

“France and the Europeans will not tolerate any attempt at foreign interference in their electoral processes, regardless of where it comes from,” Barrot wrote.

French officials have also been irked by US Ambassador to Paris Charles Kushner, who is emblematic of a brash new breed of America-first diplomats causing consternation across Europe. Kushner, whose son Jared is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, has twice failed to appear to summonses in Paris following diplomatic incidents.

Critics allege Macron plans to install loyalists

The process of installing an ambassador in Washington is carefully prescribed. Before a foreign government can appoint its envoy, it must first secure the confidential consent of the US government.

Washington rarely slow-walks or rejects nominees publicly, diplomatic sources said, with concerns typically resolved privately before a formal decision is made.

Critics allege that a wave of recent Macron nominations and appointments to key jobs is part of an effort to install loyalists who can ensure his legacy and hedge against a potential victory by the far-right in next year’s election.

Macron, whose approval ratings remain low, cannot run again in 2027.

In recent months, he has appointed his former chief of staff, Emmanuel Moulin, as head of France’s central bank, while Richard Ferrand was chosen to lead the Constitutional Council and Amélie de Montchalin to head the Cour des Comptes, which certifies the public accounts. All are key Macron allies.

The Elysee had no immediate comment on that criticism.

This post was originally published on here. 

Israel First Party leader MK Sharren Haskel said her newly launched party would need only six Knesset seats to reshape the country’s next government after the upcoming elections.

She told The Jerusalem Post in a recent interview that her party could allow Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bloc and the opposition to form a broad Zionist coalition rather than rely on haredi (ultra-Orthodox) or Arab parties.

Haskel’s plan involved a government that could consist of both parties from Netanyahu’s bloc and the opposition bloc seeking to oust the premier in the upcoming elections, set for October 27. The Yashar Party led by Gadi Eisenkot has been the leading party in the opposition bloc in recent polls.

“I want to build a bloc of six mandates that will not allow Netanyahu to build a bloc with the ultra-Orthodox and will not allow Eisenkot to build a bloc with the Arabs,” she said. “I’m not in the pocket of either of them, and I’m going to force both of them at the end of the day to sit together. And yes, it is most likely that Netanyahu will get most of the mandates.”

“They have to sit together. Otherwise, we continue in the cycle of hatred, of poisoning our people, of division, and of concentrating on one thing: a person instead of security, a person instead of the economy, a person instead of education,” she continued.

“When I see this map, I know we have to stop this political math of camps, and we have to build Israel first as people who want to see security first, the economy first, before personalized politics.”

Haskel said that the only option for Israel to have a united Zionist coalition was through a broad government that would not include either the Arab or haredi parties. She also ruled out left-wing Democrats party leader Yair Golan from a coalition, stating that the remarks he had made in the past caused him not to be a viable Zionist partner.

Haskel: Golan damaged Israel’s global reputation

“I’m really afraid that someone like Golan with … 12, 14 mandates will receive six ministers [in the next government]. He lied about the IDF, about Israeli soldiers. He blackened our name in the international community, in the media. I struggled with it,” she said.

“I think there’s no other parliament member – Left, Right, coalition, opposition, or minister – that had more interviews in foreign media than what I did, and I had to deal with the result of his actions, of his lies,” she added.

Haskel had announced earlier this month that she was resigning from the government after the Knesset passed legislation freezing the arrests of haredi draft evaders, saying she could no longer stand behind the government’s decisions.

She has been a fierce critic of the series of legislation being advanced by the haredi parties – with government backing – which critics argue encourages draft evasion, even amid the IDF’s severe manpower crisis.

Following her resignation, she announced that she would be launching her new right-wing political party called Israel First.

Haskel’s resignation also came amid reports of various right-wing figures considering joining or creating a new right-wing party ahead of the upcoming elections.

Other names raised in connection with talks about forming the alternative party are former Israeli UN ambassador Gilad Erdan and Likud MK Yuli Edelstein.

Haskel seeking alliances with those who will govern alongside Netanyahu

Speaking on potential alliances with her party and others, Haskel said that she would consider alliances with those who see themselves as able to be part of a broad Zionist government and would be willing to sit in a government with Netanyahu.

“We’ve been discussing that there are many good people who should come and join forces together. I think that … there’s a lot of good people that need to be in the system,” she said.

She said that there should be “no boycotting.”

“We cannot continue with this madness. We need to put Israel first, and put security first. Bibi [Netanyahu] is not at the top of our priority. If he’s prime minister, he will be chosen to be a prime minister,” she said.

Addressing her resignation, Haskel said that the legislative blitz that passed numerous contentious laws in the Knesset in its last week before the recess was corrupt.

“Where we are at war, our soldiers are being stretched to their max.”

“They’re paying the highest prices during the last three years. I mean, this is family, economic prices, physical injuries, emotional everything. And for a year and a half, I’ve been at war to make sure that I watch their back.”

Haskel explained that she had not resigned earlier throughout the government’s term because she did not think the legislation would be passed, and that she believed it could fight it from within the coalition.

Though Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, leader of the New Hope-United Right Party, which she was part of, announced last year that he would return to Likud, Haskel said that joining the party was not an option for her.

Speaking on why she could not return to Likud, Haskel said that it was not the party she grew up with and that she could no longer align with its values.

“Even Netanyahu knows that the Likud is not the Likud that we knew. He was [even] trying to cancel the primaries,” she said.

Speaking on the policies that her party would be pushing for, Haskel said that she was “very hawkish on security. I am extremely liberal on the economic side – less taxes, less regulation, less government involvement, less bureaucracy. And so I know … my DNA, my philosophy, everything. It’s liberty. It’s freedom. Right. And for me to be able to say that is heartbreaking.”

Haskel said her party could function as a new home for right-wing voters.

“I know the polls are showing that there’s 10% of Israelis, the vast majority of them are on the Right side of the map, and they feel homeless. They feel deserted. They feel they don’t have a political home. So I said, enough with the talks, enough with everything. I’m building a political home. Israel first,” she shared.

“I’m going to run with it. I’m going to get everybody together. I’m going to build the railways. I’m going to build… the train, and we’re going to build all the infrastructure.

“We’re going to start with campaigns, and we’re going to call all the good people in the Right to come and join forces together, because I truly believe the next elections are critical,” Haskel said.

This post was originally published on here. 

Educators in Connecticut must develop curriculum materials for Islamic and Arab studies according to a new state law that went into effect earlier this month.

The new law, which appears as a small provision in a larger bill, requires the State Board of Education (SBE) to make curriculum materials available to school boards on Islamic and Arab studies and encourage them to provide this instruction.

The law already requires SBE to make curriculum materials available for various other programs, such as African-American and Black studies, Puerto Rican and Latino studies, Native American studies, and Asian American and Pacific Islander studies, and the Holocaust and genocide awareness.

After the state develops the materials to teach Islamic and Arab studies, it will be optional for districts to include the studies in their own curricula.

Several Muslim leaders and Democratic politicians mostly welcomed the move.

According to the Hartford Courant, Farhan Memon, CAIR-CT chairman, said, “No one is saying, or no one expects that every school in Connecticut is going to teach Arabic next year. But if a school wanted to, then the state Department of Education would have a curriculum ready for them to do that.”

“We want to make sure that as the state fulfills its mandate to create this curriculum, that it’s done with a view that’s not only accurate, but also ensures that we’re not introducing new biases into the curriculum at the same time,” Memon added, according to CT Insider.

Legislation ‘mirrors Holocaust legislation’

Rep. Jennifer Leeper said in a statement that the legislation “mirrors existing legislation for Holocaust and genocide education, Black studies, Native American studies, and Puerto Rican and Latino studies.

“Adding another religion helps our children understand the world around them, their classmates, and their neighbors, which is critical for preparing our students to succeed in the most diverse country on earth,” she said.

However, various Republican lawmakers criticized it.

“I don’t believe that the state should be engaging in a curriculum that is advancing any religion,” said House Republican leader Vincent Candelora, according to the Courant. “It’s sort of the fundamental component of our First Amendment. I think that legislation went too far in including Islamic studies. I think it is treading on the constitutional notion of separation of church and state.”

‘Clearly unconstitutional’

Chris Healy, executive director of the Connecticut Catholic Conference, concurred. The Courant cited him as saying that the Islamic curriculum “validates, endorses the teaching of public religion in a public school, which is a clear violation of the First Amendment.”

“This is so clearly unconstitutional,” he said. “These issues were brought respectfully to the legislators, and yet they decided to go forward. It’s similar to the outrage people would have if the Ten Commandments were put on the wall.”

In the same bill, a provision was introduced to create a 15-member working group to address antisemitism in public schools.

Under the bill, the group must develop guidance and resources to address issues relating to antisemitism that affect students, families, educators, and school personnel.

This post was originally published on here. 

A group of Lebanese lawyers filed a complaint with the country’s top prosecutor on Wednesday requesting an investigation into banker Antoun Sehnaoui over a dinner he allegedly co-hosted in Washington that was attended by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The document accused Sehnaoui of “communicating with the Israeli enemy,” one of the complainants, lawyer Mohamad Amer Al Haj Hassan, told reporters.

The complaint reflects the heightened sensitivity in Lebanon over potential normalization of ties with Israel, as Israel continues efforts to combat Lebanese terrorist organization Hezbollah.

Lebanese law prohibits nationals from any transactions with Israeli citizens and institutions. Lebanon remains officially in a state of war with Israel despite a pledge by Beirut during recent US-brokered talks to establish peaceful ties.

A statement by Netanyahu’s office said the prime minister attended a July 27 dinner in honor of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a strong backer of Israel who died on July 11, without saying who organized it.

An Israeli official and a source briefed on the dinner said it had been organized by Sehnaoui and Morgan Ortagus, who previously served as US President Donald Trump’s deputy special envoy to the Middle East.

Lebanese lawmaker decries dinner as ‘major moral, national crisis’

In a post on X/Twitter, Lebanese lawmaker Halima Kaakour called Sehnaoui’s meeting with Netanyahu a “major moral and national crisis” at a time when the IDF is still deployed in parts of southern Lebanon.

Sehnaoui, who resides in the United States, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The banker, who hails from a prominent banking family and is the chairman of Societe Generale de Banque au Liban, previously sparked controversy in Lebanon with a post on his X/Twitter account in April, saying he had attended a Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony in Washington with Ortagus.

This post was originally published on here. 

At least ten people were wounded after a jeep overturned near Mitzpe Yeriho in the West Bank on Wednesday, Magen David Adom said.

A 17-year-old girl was severely wounded and has been sedated, MDA said, noting that she is on a ventilator.

Another woman around 20 years old and a 15-year-old girl were moderately wounded, MDA added.

The other seven victims, all female, sustained light wounds from the accident, which occured during a field trip, according to United Hatzalah.

Nine of the victims were evacuated to hospitals by ambulance and helicopter.

MDA paramedics describe experience at scene of accident

“When we arrived at the scene, we noticed the jeep upside down in a ditch,” an MDA paramedic said. “We immediately began performing initial examinations and life-saving first aid to 9 victims with varying degrees of injury and evacuated them by MDA-Rescue Air helicopter with intensive care units and ambulances together with IDF medical forces to hospitals.”

Another MDA paramedic described the condition of the 17-year-old victim, noting her critical condition.

“One of the victims, a 17-year-old girl, was unconscious, trapped in the Jeep, and suffered from multiple systemic injuries,” he said. “After we rescued her, we provided her with life-saving medical treatment that included anesthesia and ventilation and evacuated her by MDA-Rescue Air helicopter to the hospital in critical condition.”

This post was originally published on here. 

“Better to die than enlist” goes the slogan shouted by extremist haredim (ultra-Orthodox) at anti-conscription rallies.

Yet the latest IDF figures suggest that, for a growing number of young haredi men, the calculation is rather different: better to enlist than face arrest, prosecution, or personal sanctions.

According to a Yediot Aharonot report on Wednesday, at least 4,000 haredim enlisted between July 2025 and July 2026, compared with 2,800 the year before and 2,200 during the first year of the war. Before October 7, the annual figure stood at only about 1,700.

Of those 4,000 recruits, roughly 1,000 entered combat units.

While that is still only slightly more than one-quarter of the approximately 14,000 haredim who reach draft age each year – and while it falls well short of meeting the army’s manpower shortage of some 7,500 combat soldiers, and another 7,500 soldiers needed in non-combat roles – it is nevertheless a significant trend.

Just as significant is when it is taking place.

This increase comes as leading haredi rabbis have adopted increasingly strident positions against enlistment, extremist protesters continue to harass haredi recruits at induction centers, and the coalition has tried to roll back some of the very sanctions that appear to be encouraging more haredim to serve.

The coalition’s last-ditch effort in the Knesset to blunt those sanctions by freezing the arrest of draft evaders – an effort temporarily blocked on Tuesday by a High Court of Justice injunction – illustrates just how contentious the issue has become.

The impact of sanctions

According to the Yediot report, based on IDF Manpower Directorate figures, one reason for the increase is the shift from institutional sanctions against yeshivas to personal sanctions against individuals, together with stepped-up enforcement, arrests of draft dodgers, and the threat of criminal proceedings.

The figures lend weight to the argument that sanctions matter.

For years, opponents of tougher enforcement argued that haredim could not be compelled to enlist and that it would be impossible to force them into the army.

These numbers do not prove that every haredi man reaching conscription age can be drafted. But they do suggest that changing incentives changes behavior, particularly on the margins and among those who are not fully committed to remaining in the yeshiva world and learning full time. And oftentimes, what starts on the margins eventually seeps into the mainstream.

It would be a mistake, however, to attribute the increase solely to greater enforcement and sanctions.

IDF works to find ways haredim can serve

Over the last two years, the IDF has made a concerted effort to create frameworks in which haredim can serve without fearing that military service necessarily means abandoning their way of life.

The establishment of the Hashmonaim Brigade, dedicated training tracks, clearer protections for religious observance, and additional programs tailored to the haredi community have reduced one of the principal obstacles to enlistment.

In other words, the state has not relied only on a stick; it has also offered a “safe” landing spot in the army to assuage fears that if haredi youth go into the army, they will in the intervening years throw off their black hats and black coats and come out something different entirely.

Sanctions may persuade someone sitting on the fence to reconsider avoiding military service. But that decision becomes considerably easier when the army offers a framework allowing him to remain haredi while serving.

Israel has seen this dynamic of policy impacting ingrained behavior before; it is one Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu triggered when he was finance minister in Ariel Sharon’s government in 2003.

When Netanyahu slashed child allowances that had disproportionately benefited large haredi and Arab families, many in both communities howled and predicted disaster.

But what followed, at least in haredi society, was a profound shift in economic behavior. Haredi women entered the workforce in unprecedented numbers, and employment among haredi men also rose. The cuts did not change ideology. But they did change behavior.

The immediate impact in the Arab sector was not to drive women into the workforce, but rather to accelerate a drop in fertility rates.

Economics matters – people want to eat

The lesson many policymakers drew was simple: economics matters; people want to eat.

The same logic appears to be at work today. “Emergency” fundraising campaigns abroad in Lakewood and Los Angeles by leading haredi rabbis can help offset some of the loss of government support to yeshivas, but cannot replace billions of shekels in state funding.

Likewise, while the state may never arrest tens of thousands of draft evaders, the cumulative effect of losing daycare subsidies, housing benefits, and other forms of government assistance does appear to be influencing decisions.

This is not meant to draw a direct line from the arrests and cut childcare subsidies to the increase in conscription. The increase in enlistment undoubtedly reflects several factors, including the IDF’s efforts to accommodate haredi recruits and an enhanced sense of responsibility by some after October 7.

But these numbers reinforce the argument that personal sanctions are also changing behavior.

If the polls are correct and the next government will likely be less dependent on the haredi parties, that combination of incentives and enforcement is likely to be stepped up.

And if that happens, “We would rather die than enlist” may continue to echo at anti-conscription demonstrations. But for a growing number of young haredi men, it may no longer reflect the choice they are making.

This post was originally published on here. 

Disclaimer: This story contains disturbing imagery, including references to sexual assault and violence.

The Central District Court in Lod sentenced Barkat Abu Issa to 21 years in prison on Wednesday for breaking into a woman’s Gedera home, binding and raping her while her three young children were inside.

Abu Issa, 25, was convicted following a trial of rape under aggravated circumstances, burglary of a residential building, and abuse of a minor over the February 2023 attack.

The court also ordered him to pay NIS 200,000 in compensation, comprising NIS 150,000 to the woman and NIS 50,000 to her son, who was two years old at the time of the attack.

The panel directly addressed the woman at the end of its ruling, saying that she had suffered an unbearable and life-altering assault and continued to contend with its effects on her and her children.

“It took strength and fortitude for her to stand in court and testify about the severe harm she experienced,” the judges wrote, expressing hope that the end of the criminal proceedings would allow her to find the strength needed for her own recovery and that of her children.

Abu Issa had planned the attack

According to the ruling, Abu Issa drove from his home in Tel Sheva to Gedera and parked near the woman’s building. He had previously worked at a construction site near her home and was familiar with the area.

He approached the building at around 2:22 a.m. wearing dark clothing, gloves, a hood, and a covering over his mouth and nose. He was carrying two rolls of thick tape, which the court said demonstrated significant advance preparation and an attempt to avoid identification.

Abu Issa climbed onto the balcony of the second-floor apartment and entered through a closed but unlocked window.

The woman had been sleeping with her three children, then aged approximately two, four, and five-and-a-half, and woke to nurse her toddler. After hearing noises from the balcony, she entered the living room with the child and encountered Abu Issa.

When she cried out for help, he covered her mouth, threatened to kill her, threw her to the floor, and bound her hands and legs. He also covered her eyes and mouth with tape as her toddler stood nearby crying.

Abu Issa demanded to know where she kept her money and telephone and led her, still bound, into the apartment’s safe room. When she attempted to crawl toward the door, he returned and again threatened to murder her.

He then removed the toddler from the room and raped the woman as she cried.

Afterward, Abu Issa brought the child back to his mother, went into the kitchen, took a bottle of beer from the refrigerator, and drank it. He told the woman that her older children could help release her.

Her four-year-old son subsequently awoke and, after Abu Issa fled, used a kitchen knife to cut through the tape binding his mother.

The attack left the whole family deeply traumatized

The attack left the woman with injuries to her wrists, ankles, back, and lip, as well as a broken front tooth. The court said victim-impact reports showed that both she and her toddler developed post-traumatic symptoms and that the attack had profoundly affected the entire family.

The judges found that the toddler’s exposure to the violence against his mother, his fear and helplessness, and his presence before and after the rape amounted to psychological abuse of a minor.

They described the attack as a prolonged and terrifying event and emphasized that it took place inside the woman’s home, which should have been a place of safety for her and her children.

The court rejected a defense argument that Abu Issa’s actions were not at the highest level of severity because he had used oil during the rape and removed the toddler from the room before the sexual assault itself.

His actions were cruel regardless, the judges said, and were carried out while terrorizing the woman and threatening her life and the lives of her children.

Prosecutors had asked the court to sentence Abu Issa to 24 years in prison, while the defense sought a sentencing range of nine to 14 years. The court set the appropriate range at 17 to 23 years and placed Abu Issa in its upper third, noting that he had not accepted responsibility, expressed remorse, or undergone treatment.

The panel also ordered the forfeiture of Abu Issa’s car, finding that he had used it to travel to the apartment and flee afterward. It declined to impose a separate fine.

Time spent in custody since his arrest on February 4, 2023, will generally be credited against the sentence. However, the court refused to credit an 18-month period during which Abu Issa was simultaneously serving a separate prison sentence for causing the deaths of two friends by negligence in a traffic accident.

Abu Issa has 45 days to appeal the sentence to the Supreme Court.

This post was originally published on here. 

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir was forced to apologize for Defense Minister Israel Katz’s remarks revealing that US planes were taking off from Israeli bases to attack Iran, Saudi outlet Al-Arabiya reported on Wednesday.

According to Al-Arabiya, which cited military sources, the officers in charge of the US Central Command (CENTCOM) were outraged about Katz’s comments, forcing Zamir to issue an apology about the situation.

However, the IDF later dismissed the Al-Arabiya report, stating that “the publication regarding the conversation between the chief of staff and the CENTCOM commander [Adm. Brad Cooper] is incorrect. The chief of staff has not spoken with the CENTCOM commander since the minister’s remarks were published.”

The report also claimed, according to its sources, that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was “furious” following Katz’s comments regarding the American planes taking off from Israel.

Additionally, Al-Arabiya reported that a state of “maximum alert” was declared, fearing that the revelation made by Katz would trigger an Iranian attack against Israel.

IDF intercepts drones over Jordan

Katz spoke on Tuesday with right-wing TV outlet Channel 14’s “Bitchonistim,” and claimed that “the Iranians know” that the jets have taken off from Israel to strike Iran.

On Monday and Tuesday, the IDF intercepted at least three drones in the Jordanian border region. A source told The Jerusalem Post that the drones were likely launched by Iran-backed Shi’ite militias in Iraq.

“We know how to manage things, and we are prepared,” Katz said when asked about these developments.

“The arrogant empire that threatened to destroy Israel has collapsed,” Katz added.

“We announced in the clearest terms that if Israel is fired upon, we will attack with all our might. We are prepared to strike Iran,” he warned.

James Genn and Amichai Stein contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

A Norwegian teenager was convicted on Wednesday of conspiracy to commit murder in Britain after being recruited by a Swedish organized crime group that prosecutors said was being used by the Iranian government.

Johannes Natland, now 19, was arrested in a hotel room in Huddersfield, northern England, in March last year with two firearms and ammunition in his possession.

Prosecutors said Natland had been recruited by the Foxtrot Network, a Swedish organized crime group used by the Iranian state and sanctioned by both Britain and the United States.

Natland had admitted possessing a semi-automatic pistol, a revolver and ammunition, but denied conspiracy to murder, saying he did not intend to carry out the plan.

After a retrial at London’s Old Bailey court, Natland was found guilty of conspiracy to murder. A jury at his initial trial in June could not reach a verdict on that charge.

Foreign states recruiting individuals to serve as unwitting proxy forces

Natland is the latest young adult to stand trial in Britain and elsewhere over serious criminal acts allegedly carried out after being recruited online for money, often as an unwitting proxy for a foreign state.

Prosecutor Alistair Richardson told jurors that Natland was recruited by the Foxtrot Network, after someone using the name “Agent 47” organized hiring an assassin with €25,000 ($28,500) “in the pot” to pay for it.

Natland “neither knew, nor cared who he was to kill … to him, this was all about the money,” Richardson said.

This post was originally published on here. 

Two friends of missing Dimona resident Eldar Dayan remain in custody as police investigate both his disappearance and a possible criminal incident involving a damaged vehicle abandoned in Petah Tikva.

Police are examining several possibilities, including that Dayan was abducted or that he disappeared after becoming involved in a suspected hit-and-run. Investigators have not publicly determined what happened to him or located a person allegedly injured in the suspected collision.

The Beersheba Magistrate’s Court extended the detention of Omri Peretz and Maksim Braverman by six days on Tuesday, until August 2. The two are suspected of obstruction of justice and conspiracy to commit a felony.

The men were initially questioned as witnesses but were arrested after investigators identified contradictions between their accounts and other evidence collected in the case. Police said the two had been seen with Dayan in the Petah Tikva area on July 18.

Dayan, 23, was initially reported to have last been seen near Yarkon Park in Tel Aviv on July 17. Before contact with him was lost, he sent a WhatsApp message saying there was “trouble” and that he intended to return home. His telephone has since been unavailable, according to his family.

Vehicle connected to group found in Petah Tikva

A vehicle connected to the group was found abandoned near a gas station in Petah Tikva with a shattered window and apparent bloodstains. Police are investigating whether the damage and forensic findings are connected to an altercation, a suspected collision, or subsequent efforts to conceal what occurred.

The two detainees provided conflicting accounts of the hours preceding Dayan’s disappearance. One described an altercation after which the vehicle’s window was broken, and the group fled, while the other denied taking part in the alleged fight or traveling in the same vehicle.

Police told the court that the investigation includes suspicions of a hit-and-run and abandoning an injured person. At the same time, investigators are examining the possibility that Dayan was abducted in connection with a criminal incident. Police have stressed that the investigation remains in an early stage and that the circumstances have not been established.

Dayan’s mother, Shilat Naim, said investigators had told members of the family that they believed he was alive, although police have not publicly disclosed the basis for that assessment. She said the family remained concerned that someone might be holding him.

This post was originally published on here. 

The ITIM organization petitioned the High Court of Justice against the Chief Rabbinate on Wednesday, demanding that it update its registration policy for rabbinical certification exams so that men who have not regularized their military status cannot use years of yeshiva study completed during that period to qualify.

The petition centers on much more than the right to sit an examination. Chief Rabbinate certificates carry significant professional and financial advantages, including recognition equivalent to an academic degree for certain public-sector positions and eligibility for higher salary rankings.

ITIM argued that the state cannot award those benefits on the basis of years of study completed while an applicant was failing to comply with his legal obligation to report for military service.

This comes as the High Court prepares to rule on a separate law passed earlier this month that sought to suspend arrest, investigation and enforcement proceedings against qualifying ultra-Orthodox (haredi) men who fail to report for service.

The court kept that law frozen following a hearing before an expanded nine-justice panel on Tuesday and said a final judgment would be issued soon.

The petition lists the Chief Rabbinate, its Examinations and Certification Department, and the Religious Services Ministry as respondents.

Applicants currently have to study for three years in a yeshiva

Under the Rabbinate’s current rules, applicants must generally have studied for at least three years in an advanced yeshiva or kollel before they can sit the certification exams.

ITIM is asking the court to require every applicant to provide confirmation that he has regularized his status with the military authorities and to prevent study undertaken during a period of unresolved draft status from counting toward the three-year requirement.

According to the petition, a public authority cannot recognize a period of study as satisfying an official eligibility requirement when that study was undertaken alongside an ongoing failure to comply with the law.

That claim reflects the current legal position governing the haredi draft. The statutory framework that had allowed the state to defer the service of full-time yeshiva students expired in June 2023 without being replaced.

In June 2024, a unanimous nine-justice High Court panel ruled that the government no longer had legal authority to refrain from drafting eligible yeshiva students or to continue funding institutions for students legally required to serve.

The court returned to the issue in November 2025, ordering the government to formulate an effective enforcement policy without delay. That policy, the justices said, was required to include meaningful criminal enforcement as well as broader economic and civil measures.

After finding that the government had failed to implement the ruling, the court issued a more detailed decision in April directing specific ministries and public bodies to consider conditioning subsidized housing, daycare assistance, public-transport discounts and municipal tax reductions on the recipient having regularized his draft status.

ITIM: State cannot provide civil, economic advantages to draft dodgers

The principle behind those rulings is also central to ITIM’s new petition: The state cannot continue providing civil and economic advantages that arise from, or facilitate, noncompliance with the draft law.

The Knesset attempted to alter the enforcement situation on July 14, when it passed a temporary law protecting qualifying yeshiva students from arrest, investigation, prosecution and other proceedings for failing to report.

The amendment meant that the state would have been prevented from enforcing the draft. Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara described the arrangement as a discriminatory “group immunity mechanism” that protected one sector while leaving other draft evaders exposed to the law.

Justice Ofer Grosskopf froze the amendment the day after it passed, meaning that the existing legal obligation and enforcement framework remain in place while the court considers whether to strike the legislation down.

The new case also builds on ITIM’s previous legal battle over women’s access to the same examinations.

In July 2025, the High Court unanimously ruled that the Chief Rabbinate could not prevent women from sitting its certification exams. The Rabbinate subsequently sought a retrial and attempted to delay implementation of the decision, but that request was rejected in November. Registration was ultimately opened to women in February 2026.

One of the central arguments raised by ITIM and the women petitioners was that the examinations do not confer rabbinic ordination but do grant access to secular, state-backed professional and financial benefits.

The Rabbinate’s first-tier certification, when combined with the required period of yeshiva study, is treated by regional hiring committees as equivalent to an academic degree, a qualification required for nearly all public rabbinical positions. That equivalency can also affect public-sector pay scales, including the salaries of religious-studies teachers.

The petitioners in the women’s case argued that it was unlawful to reserve those advantages for men. The new petition argues that the same benefits cannot be granted to applicants based on years of study accumulated while they were not complying with their military obligations.

ITIM said information it received from the Chief Rabbinate through a freedom of information request showed that the median age of those sitting the examinations was 30. It added that hundreds of younger applicants within military-service age take the exams each year.

The organization said it petitioned the court after a series of requests and warning letters sent to the Chief Rabbinate’s legal department beginning in November received no response.

“When the security burden on the serving public is unbearable, it is essential to ensure that the religious establishment does not encourage non-enlistment, even indirectly,” ITIM chairman and president Rabbi Seth Farber said.

“The public expects those who are destined to serve as spiritual leaders and hold religious positions to be the first to obey the law and participate in our collective security effort,” he added.

Attorney Shaya Schloss of ITIM’s legal department said a public authority could not count “years of draft evasion” as a criterion for granting professional and financial advancement.

“We expect the Rabbinate to act in accordance with the law and the principle of equality and to join the effort to protect Israel’s security,” Schloss said.

This post was originally published on here. 

A new initiative protesting the live animal shipment industry launched in Israel on Wednesday, funded by a donation made by the late actress Brigitte Bardot, who was known in her lifetime for her animal welfare advocacy.

The campaign includes 100 ads on buses across the country with a photo of an animal taken from inside animal transport trucks, with the message, “You’re on your way to a vacation. They’re on their way to hell.”

In order to ensure her wishes are honored, a team from the Brigitte Bardot Foundation flew to Israel to oversee the preparations and approve the campaign materials ahead of the rollout, which was chosen to take place during Israel’s busiest travel period.

“Every calf and lamb featured in the campaign was documented in real time upon arriving in Israel after a grueling sea voyage,” Yaron Lapidot, one of the founders of Israel Against Live Shipments, said

“Sadly, in most cases we know that the animals shown in the campaign are no longer alive. The purpose of the campaign is to restore faces and identities to the statistics and remind people that these are living animals forced to endure a long and difficult journey only to be slaughtered in Israel.”

Bardot had funded a similar bus campaign last year, and had ensured the campaign could continue even after she was gone.

Bardot: Jewish values could transform animal welfare

Netanel Sheler, head of the Freedom for Animals’ public awareness efforts, explained that Bardot pushed for a campaign in Israel specifically because she felt that the Jewish traditions surrounding animal welfare could “serve as the foundation for meaningful social change, particularly among religious and conservative communities.”

According to Sheler, she chose to center her campaign around the High Holidays for that reason.

“Although she faced harsh criticism and attacks from anti-Israel activists because she chose to support an Israeli organization during the war, she never considered reversing her decision. She believed animal welfare rises above political disputes, and that real change is created not by a single campaign but through an ongoing process of public awareness,” Sheler said.

“About six months after her death, we received a phone call from her team informing us that the foundation had decided to honor her commitment and proceed with the donation exactly as she had requested. For us, it was an especially emotional moment. We understood that this was not merely a financial contribution but a continuation of the path she believed in and her commitment to the fight against live animal shipments in Israel.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Opposition leader Yair Lapid asked Democratic US senators not to “give up” on Israel during a meeting in Washington on Wednesday, Lapid’s office confirmed.

The meeting, led by Senator Jackie Rosen, was attended by senior Democrats in the US Senate, including Senators Tim Kaine, Michael Bennett, Richard Blumenthal, Maggie Hassan, Cory Booker, Brian Schatz, Alex Peddie, John Hickenlooper and Catherine Cortez Masto.

Lapid pressed the senators to continue showing solidarity with Israel “in the face of challenges,” emphasizing the importance of coordination and partnership.

The opposition leader arrived in the United States earlier this week to attend the wake of senator Lindsey Graham, who passed away on July 11 following a sudden illness.

Netanyahu meets with Trump, tells Hannity he’s not afraid of ICC warrant

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also in the US, having attended the wake and met with US President Donald Trump on Tuesday. 

Earlier on Wednesday, Netanyahu told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he was not afraid to travel internationally despite the active International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for his arrest, saying that he has “special forces protection.”

James Genn contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

The cost of the next Air Force One program for the US president has risen by another $280 million, increasing Boeing’s total losses on the project to $3.08 billion, the US aerospace giant reported in its second-quarter earnings report.

The pair of VC-25A aircraft currently serving as President Donald Trump‘s Air Force One fleet are now more than 30 years old. Boeing signed a fixed-price $3.9 billion contract to supply the US Air Force with two new aircraft based on the 747-8, the final version of the iconic jumbo jet, whose production ended in 2023. 

To reduce costs and accelerate the schedule, the company purchased two secondhand aircraft and began converting them for presidential use.

Instead, the program has turned into both a financial and public relations disaster for Boeing. The prestige of building the aircraft that carries the president of the United States led the company to accept a fixed-price contract, leaving it responsible for all additional costs.

The project consists of two identical aircraft, with the first originally scheduled for delivery in 2024. However, repeated configuration changes, extensive electrical rewiring, corrosion discovered in the aircraft structures, a known issue affecting the 747-8 fleet, and technological upgrades required because of the project’s prolonged timeline and the obsolescence of some onboard systems have resulted in major cost overruns and years of delay.

Boeing has been forced to rapidly recruit senior engineers and mechanics while paying exceptionally high salaries to employees holding the highest levels of security clearance, a mandatory requirement for working on what is considered the world’s most secure aircraft.

During the last quarter, Boeing further increased its investment in the project by adding personnel and resources to meet the revised schedule, which calls for delivery of the first aircraft in 2028 and the second a year later. 

Among the latest modifications is the installation of a new classified communications system that will allow the president to conduct secure conversations from the aircraft with senior US government and military officials.

The program is expected to cost $6.9 billion

The program is now expected to cost approximately $6.9 billion in total. Because Boeing failed to ensure compensation for future design changes and upgrades and underestimated the scope of the work required, the company will absorb the difference between what it receives from the US government and the project’s full cost.

Because the current Air Force One aircraft are aging, Trump advanced the acquisition of a Boeing 747-8 that had previously served Qatar’s royal family as a temporary solution. 

After several months of modifications, Trump flew aboard the aircraft only a handful of times. However, after arriving in Turkey aboard the jet, he departed on one of the older Air Force One aircraft, which had been dispatched to the country because the temporary aircraft lacked the defensive systems installed on the existing presidential fleet. US authorities had also received a warning that Iran might attempt to assassinate Trump as he departed Turkey.

Israel’s ‘Wing of Zion’ aircraft

In that respect, the Air Force One project bears similarities to Israel’s “Wing of Zion” prime ministerial aircraft. In Israel, Israel Aerospace Industries defeated Elbit Systems in the tender to acquire and convert a used Boeing 767 into the Israeli equivalent of Air Force One. That project also exceeded both its original budget and schedule.

Earlier this week, Yedioth Ahronoth reported that, according to figures from the Prime Minister’s Office, purchasing and converting the aircraft cost NIS 325 million. 

In addition, between 2023 and 2025 Israeli taxpayers spent NIS 60 million solely on operating the aircraft. Operating costs totaled NIS 34.18 million in 2024, then declined to NIS 18.67 million in 2025.

The apparent reason was the sharp reduction in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s overseas travel following the issuance of international arrest warrants against him. As a result, the aircraft remained grounded for much of the time while the state continued to pay its flight and ground crews and to cover ongoing training costs.

The Prime Minister’s Office refused to disclose the cost of individual flights, including fuel, security, catering, and crew expenses, or the aircraft’s insurance costs, arguing that releasing the information “could harm state security.”

Although the acquisition of Wing of Zion was justified in part by the need to transport the prime minister’s entourage and accompanying journalists, the Prime Minister’s Office declined to allow journalists to travel aboard the current trip to the United States, instead requiring them to travel on commercial flights.

This post was originally published on here. 

Iraq’s National Security Council condemned the US and Saudi Arabia’s overnight joint strikes against Iran-backed Iraqi militias, after an emergency meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi on Wednesday.

Zaidi’s office denounced the strikes, stating that it is the Iraqi government’s responsibility to deal with security concerns originating within its borders, even if outside nations raise the concerns.

US President Donald Trump earlier claimed to Fox News’s Trey Yingst that the strikes were carried out in coordination with the Iraqi government.

The National Security Council stated that the strikes occurred as Iraq was in the midst of communicating with “concerned parties” to verify and address reports of Iran-backed militias targeting Saudi Arabia and US forces in the region. 

They asserted their firm rejection of “all hostile acts, regardless of the executing party or justifications relied upon.” 

Zaidi’s office announced that, in light of the strikes, Iraq would establish a comprehensive security plan to “confront any violation of Iraq’s sovereignty” and prevent any entities within Iraq from working to threaten neighboring countries.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

The United Arab Emirates, thanks to years of anticipatory planning, is not in a position where it will need to bow to the Islamic Republic’s demands to administer and charge fees for the crossing of the Strait of Hormuz, former Emirati diplomat Obaid al-Zaabi told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

Al-Zaabi, who currently works in bolstering the UAE’s food security in the field of agri-tech innovation, spoke to the Post shortly after the Islamic Republic took a harsher stance on Hormuz, abandoning earlier propositions to see the vital waterway split between Iranian and Omani control.

Kazem Gharibabadi, deputy foreign minister of the Islamic Republic, said on Tuesday that the entirety of the inbound shipping lane and the majority of the outbound shipping lane should be entirely under Iranian control.

Al-Zaabi made it clear that the Emirates had no intention of accepting Oman’s proposal to allow Iran control over 50% of the waterway, noting that the three islands in Hormuz – Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb – that were taken under Iranian occupation since 1971 were reason enough to oppose the plan.

“The three islands in Hormuz are our islands, and we claim them, and they killed Emirati people when they took them in 1971, so we are not okay with their policy. We do not accept Oman’s policy,” he asserted.

Gulf States can still concede to Iran’s demands

Though the UAE will refuse to pay a toll, al-Zaabi acknowledged that there is a chance other Gulf states will concede to Iran, hoping to avoid conflict and lacking any real leverage to challenge Tehran. As a global re-export powerhouse, the UAE’s ability to ship items to and from Iran makes the country too valuable to restrict, he suggested.

“The truth is, they need us. They don’t have a big port that can handle the kind of port work that Dubai does. They do not have legal trading ability with other countries, so they are heavily reliant on the UAE’s infrastructure for themselves,” he continued.

Additionally, al-Zaabi highlighted that the UAE’s diversified economy is more “resilient” than many other Gulf nations, especially given the country has multiple ports, energy sources, and pipelines, allowing Abu Dhabi to withstand more Iranian pressure than other regional players like Qatar, which is largely dependent on natural gas reserves and massive Liquefied Natural Gas.

Those extra securities and technological investments have also meant that the UAE can avoid the extreme inflation being experienced by other regional actors, including Iran, he highlighted. Though by no means sustainable forever, this has made the Emiratis stronger in what he described as “a mutually hurting stalemate.”

Countries like Saudi Arabia, which al-Zaabi said “aggressively pursued de-escalation,” are also more likely to find themselves the target of Iranian drones and missiles and the attacks of Iran’s axis, because Tehran’s strategy is to create that sense of volatility that will lead Gulf states to pressure the United States to concede for the sake of quiet.

“The UAE did not seek de-escalation. Instead, it adopted a tit-for-tat approach. If they hit us, we hit them back. When they escalated, we were willing to match that escalation. If they attack our infrastructure, we will attack theirs,” he commented.

“Since Iran chose to target us, the UAE has been an active participant in the conflict. We have withheld their funds, taken part in the blockade, and remain actively engaged in fighting them. … As far as I understood, they have stopped attacking us because they know any attack against us will be reciprocated with massive force.”

UAE reportedly struck Iran, relations are now strained

The Wall Street Journal reported in May that the UAE participated in dozens of strikes on Iran, which was said to have strained relations between Gulf countries.

Until the now-defunct MoU agreement was signed in April, Tehran fired some 550 ballistic and cruise missiles and more than 2,200 drones at the UAE, according to Emirati figures in May. Though a heavy target at the beginning of the war, it seems the UAE has been attacked with the same level of fire as before since July 13, when two oil tankers were struck off the eastern coast near Khor Fakkan.

The mentality of seeking de-escalation has also allowed the issue of Iran’s proxy network to grow unchecked and unchallenged, al-Zaabi continued.

“The Saudi goal of being neutral and de-escalating has not helped them,” he said, referencing the recent attacks from Iran-backed Iraqi militias and Yemen’s Houthis.

US Central Command confirmed Riyadh has now joined the US in attacking the Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces, striking “multiple terrorist logistics and weapons sites across eastern Iraq in a strong response to over 30 IRGC-directed aerial drone attacks in the last 72 hours.”

It is yet unclear how Riyadh will respond to the Houthis’ blockade, though al-Zaabi made no secret of his view that such an outcome could have been avoided had Saudi Arabia not pressured Abu Dhabi to withdraw from Yemen last year.

“When it came to the threat posed by the proxies, the UAE wanted to continue the war against the Houthis. We did not feel comfortable having an Iranian proxy in our backyard while facing a belligerent Iran,” he said.

“The Saudis wanted to end it. We had built up a substantial force in Yemen to counter the Houthis, but the Saudis asked us to dismantle that force. In my opinion, ignoring the proxies has been a grave policy error. It has led to a situation where groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis are actively working against you in a wartime scenario,” he continued.

The UAE defense ministry announced in December that it had voluntarily ended the mission of its counterterrorism units in Yemen, after Saudi Arabia gave the UAE 24 hours’ notice to vacate the only Emirati forces still there after it withdrew in 2019.

“I don’t know what the solution is, because if a group of ragtag terrorists can hold the global economy under threat, it’s a dangerous situation. I think there are more options on the table. … I think the problem is that if everyone escalates, things will get very bad, very quickly,” al-Zaabi continued.

“Now Russia also seems to be getting pulled into the war, with Ukraine attacking Iranian ships. There is a very real risk. I think everyone is more concerned about uncontrolled escalation right now than winning, which, in and of itself, is very worrisome,” he concluded.

This post was originally published on here. 

The meeting between Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and US President Donald Trump in Washington last week carried substantial symbolism, but the more difficult test is unfolding far from the White House: across southern Lebanon and along the regional corridors that have historically supplied Hezbollah with weapons. 

Aoun’s July 21 meeting with President Trump came as a US-brokered framework between Lebanon and Israel entered an early and delicate implementation phase. The discussions centered on Hezbollah’s weapons, strengthening the Lebanese Armed Forces and securing an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, while also touching on a longer-term objective that until recently would have been politically difficult for a Lebanese president to articulate so openly. 

During the meeting, Aoun described the framework’s ultimate goal as “ending the state of hostility between Lebanon and Israel forever,” framing stability not simply as a temporary ceasefire but as part of a longer process intended to prevent Lebanon from returning repeatedly to conflict.  

That longer-term ambition remains dependent on developments on the ground. Israeli forces have begun withdrawing from designated areas in southern Lebanon, allowing Lebanese army units to deploy as part of a pilot model intended to test whether the state can progressively assume exclusive security responsibility.

The process is expected to remain gradual, with its expansion dependent on the implementation of the broader framework and the ability of the Lebanese Armed Forces to maintain control after Israeli withdrawals.  

Major test of LAF in Lebanese ‘pilot zones’

An initial major test is taking place in southern Lebanon, where Lebanese forces are beginning to assume responsibility for areas following Israeli withdrawals under the US-brokered framework. The pilot-zone approach is intended to determine whether the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) can achieve sustainable control while preventing the reemergence of independent armed infrastructure outside state authority. 

Marwan Abdallah, head of the Foreign Affairs Department at the Lebanese Kataeb Party, said the process would require continued external guarantees: “So, now we are waiting to see the implementation. We saw …  before the meeting in the White House, the Lebanese army started taking control of two areas in South Lebanon, as per the framework agreement.”

He added: “You need a third entity, and I think the US army is the partner of the Lebanese armed forces and, of course, is the partner of the Israelis, so they can play a role in being the monitoring side and being the one that guarantees the agreement between both sides.” 

Joe Truzman, a Middle East independent analyst, described the same areas as a test of a much larger question: whether the Lebanese state can become the sole security authority in the south. 

“The pilot zones are designed to test whether the Lebanese Armed Forces can assume responsibility for territory following Israeli withdrawals under the US-brokered framework while preventing Hezbollah from re-establishing an armed presence. Success would strengthen confidence in the Lebanese state’s ability to become the sole security actor,” he said. 

He nevertheless cautioned that “the Lebanese government’s previous disarmament efforts stalled and produced only partial results in the south.” 

Next phase relies on Lebanese success, Israeli confidence, Hezbollah dismantling

The next phase, he added, will depend on several actors moving in parallel. 

“Expansion will depend on sustained LAF performance, Israeli confidence that Hezbollah is not reconstituting its military infrastructure, Hezbollah’s own response, and continued external political and financial support for the Lebanese state and its army,” he noted.

For Abdallah, however, the issue extends beyond Hezbollah’s missiles alone and concerns the broader parallel structures the group maintains outside state authority. 

“I have a problem with Hezbollah’s missiles, drones, military units, assassination units, small bombs, small weapons, medium weapons, everything that Hezbollah has, ideology, education institutions, financial institutions,” he said. 

Abdallah described these as “illegal and illegitimate ways of Hezbollah gaining more power and gaining more control over their population.” 

The Washington meeting was important partly because of what Abdallah sees as a change in Lebanon’s international standing. 

“It’s not easy to be received this way by Trump… Okay, now Lebanon is back on the map. Lebanon is a country that’s respected as a sovereign nation, as a partner, not just as a state who is a source of trouble and the problems,”  he told The Media Line. 

The meeting also produced a significant change in aviation policy. President Trump announced that he was directing his administration to allow US airlines to operate direct flights to Lebanon, reversing a restriction dating to 1985.

The announcement does not mean that flights will immediately begin, since actual service will still depend on regulatory requirements and decisions by individual airlines. But after more than four decades without direct US-carrier service, the move carries symbolic weight for a country seeking to present itself again as a viable destination for international business, tourism and investment.  

Abdallah described the significance in precisely those terms: “But again, it’s not just about the flight itself. It’s about what it represents:  a renewed trust in Lebanon … that these flights can be secure and protected.”  

Truzman offered a more cautious assessment, noting that the political announcement remains separate from the technical and commercial steps needed before regular connections can actually resume. 

“The announcement regarding direct US–Lebanon commercial flights is important but remains contingent on FAA/TSA security certification and airline decisions. It should be viewed as a conditional commitment that links deeper economic engagement to improvements in Lebanon’s security environment,” he told The Media Line. 

Taken together, the aviation announcement and Aoun’s comments on ending the state of hostility with Israel point toward a wider theme surrounding his Washington visit: an attempt to reposition Lebanon internationally while rebuilding the authority of the state internally. 

But the credibility of that effort will depend primarily on implementation. 

Hezbollah’s military position has historically been connected to a wider regional logistical system linking Iran to its allies through Iraq and Syria. Recent interceptions suggest that parts of this network are now facing greater pressure. 

Syrian authorities have announced multiple seizures of weapons allegedly intended for Hezbollah. In one particularly significant case in July, Syrian authorities said they intercepted a shipment near the Iraqi border containing missiles, anti-tank weapons and drones that preliminary investigations indicated were destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah denied the allegation. Iraq subsequently announced an investigation into how the shipment reached the Syrian border and established a committee to examine the case and coordinate with Damascus.  

The developments raise the possibility that pressure on Hezbollah is increasingly operating on two interconnected levels: restricting its military infrastructure inside Lebanon while making it more difficult to regenerate that infrastructure through supply lines extending across the region. 

Abdallah sees the developments in Syria and Iraq as part of a broader decline in Iranian influence. 

“I think that what the US is managing to do is taking these countries out of the grip of the Iranians,”  he said, adding, “And I think today, not even Sanaa, maybe Teheran still control the Houthis, but the other three capitals in the Arab world Baghdad, Beirut and Damascus are out of Iranian control, and it’s a big achievement, not just for the US, but for the people of these countries,” he noted. 

He also interpreted President Trump’s references to a possible Syrian role against Hezbollah as relating primarily to the group’s logistical infrastructure rather than to Syrian forces operating inside Lebanon. 

“I think what Trump means whenever he says that he wants the Syrians to interfere, to disarm Hezbollah, I think what he means is not the Syrian army entering Lebanon, but he means that Syria dismantling and destroying all the military infrastructure and the tunnels and the supply routes that Hezbollah and Iran made inside Syria for decades,” he said. 

Truzman, however, warned against interpreting individual interceptions as evidence that Hezbollah’s broader supply architecture has already been dismantled. 

“I do not assess it as realistic to meaningfully degrade Hezbollah’s supply network without sustained cooperation from both Syria and Iraq. The logistics architecture is regional rather than linear: disrupting one corridor increases costs but does not eliminate the network,” he said. 

Syria more active in Hezbollah disarmament

Truzman added: “While Damascus has become a more active partner in interdicting weapons flows, Iraq remains the more uncertain variable, with uneven willingness among state institutions and Iran-aligned militias to enforce restrictions. Moreover, Tehran retains the capacity to adapt by rerouting shipments through alternative corridors, including maritime routes.” 

The distinction is important. Weapons seizures and investigations can make supply operations more costly and difficult, but the longer-term impact will depend on sustained cooperation between governments whose ability and willingness to confront Iran-aligned networks remain uneven. 

Similar uncertainty surrounds the pilot zones themselves. 

For the Lebanese army, expanding state authority without triggering an internal confrontation with Hezbollah remains one of the central challenges of the process. 

“This remains a significant undertaking for the LAF, which has so far avoided direct confrontation with Hezbollah to preserve domestic stability,” Truzman said. “Hezbollah is likely to resist any expansion, generating friction between the state and the group that could stall enforcement and, at the extreme, risk internal conflict,” he added. 

For Abdallah and the Kataeb Party, by contrast, the central objective is the complete removal of Hezbollah’s independent military infrastructure. 

“So it’s a new page for the country. It’s a new era. However, all this optimism cannot be achieved if we don’t solve the biggest problem, which is Hezbollah’s weapons and Hezbollah’s infrastructure,” he said. 

Abdallah argued that disarmament could eventually open the way to an Israeli withdrawal and a different form of relationship across the border. 

“But we all agree that when Hezbollah is disarmed, then there’s no out-of-the-state threat for anyone in Lebanon or in Israel. Then the Israelis will withdraw, and we are already discussing having a new track for the negotiations that will discuss the border between the two countries,” he noted. 

That prospect now sits alongside Aoun’s own public language about ultimately ending the state of hostility with Israel. It does not mean that normalization or a peace agreement is imminent. Lebanon and Israel remain technically at war, Israeli troops remain inside Lebanese territory, and fundamental disagreements persist over withdrawal, security and Hezbollah’s weapons. But the language emerging from Washington indicates that the political horizon being discussed is increasingly broader than another temporary ceasefire.  

Abdallah also argued that any future agreement would need support inside Lebanon rather than relying solely on external backing. 

“So I think it can have the foreign support that is needed, but also we need to have the domestic support that we need for this agreement,” he said. 

Truzman similarly sees a more stable relationship as conceivable, while noting that it would carry direct implications for Hezbollah’s political narrative. 

“Furthermore, a stable relationship between Beirut and Jerusalem is conceivable, but such an outcome would directly erode Hezbollah’s long-standing claim to legitimacy as an armed ‘resistance’ movement whose raison d’être is resistance against Israel,” he noted. 

Against that backdrop, the possible restoration of direct US flights also acquires greater significance. On its own, an aviation decision cannot alter Lebanon’s security balance. Symbolically, however, it fits into the same attempt to move the country away from decades in which its international image has been dominated by conflict, armed groups and instability. 

The coming phase will therefore be measured less by statements made in Washington than by whether several processes can advance simultaneously: the Lebanese army consolidating control in the south, Israeli forces continuing their withdrawal, Hezbollah refraining from rebuilding military infrastructure in transferred areas, and Syria and Iraq sustaining efforts against cross-border weapons networks. 

“Taken together, these developments suggest an increasingly coherent American strategic concept that combines pressure on Iranian proxy networks with incentives to strengthen state institutions in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq,” Truzman said. 

“The strategy’s long-term success, however, remains uncertain and depends on implementation across multiple theaters,” he added. 

The Aoun-Trump meeting may therefore prove significant not because it resolved Lebanon’s fundamental security questions, but because it brought several previously separate tracks into the same political framework: the restoration of Lebanese state authority, the disruption of Hezbollah’s regional supply system, Israeli withdrawal, economic and international reintegration, and, ultimately, the possibility of moving from recurrent confrontation toward a more stable relationship across the Lebanese-Israeli border. 

Whether those objectives can be translated from diplomatic language into lasting realities on the ground remains the central test. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s White House meeting with US President Donald Trump marked their seventh face-to-face meeting since Trump returned to office 18 months ago. The stakes were high. Nerves are frayed. The standoff with Iran is stressful – last weekend, so many Americans and Israelis were sure a massive attack was coming. And Trump’s sledgehammer leadership style banks on him being the most unpredictable leader in the room. Canadian friends joke that living above an America run by the mercurial Trump is like living on the second floor of a meth lab: you never know when it’s going to blow up.

As of this writing, it’s not clear what will happen. But even if the seemingly worst occurred and Trump dropped another F-bomb on Netanyahu, Israel should take the compliment. With Trump, as with presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, cussing out Israel’s longtime leader, while undoubtedly unpleasant, reflects the intense frustration rooted in deep commitment – and interconnectedness.

Anyone who has ever had a family or been married understands this paradox. Some of our closest human relationships can be extraordinarily volatile. Psychologists call this “attachment anger.” When strangers frustrate you, staying calm and quiet isn’t hard. But when those you love disappoint or vex or defy, anger erupts more easily.

In his 1992 blockbuster, Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, John Gray popularized another relevant concept. People apply his “rubber band theory” to all kinds of situations. The metaphor certainly explains the US-Israel dynamic. When two people, or two nations, are so enmeshed, leaders may clash, snap, even pull away, hard, fast, far, without rupture. Ultimately, the structural foundations, shared values, and overlapping needs keep them, like a stretched rubber band, bouncing back quickly.

Clinton was deeply committed to the State of Israel’s survival – and the Oslo Peace Process. When he hosted a newly elected Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House in July, 1996, the Americans, Israelis, and Palestinians had been working the Oslo process for almost three years. Doubting Yasser Arafat – for good reason – Netanyahu promised to be far more unyielding than he ultimately proved to be. 

Still, starting in the president’s own Oval Office, Netanyahu lectured his host about the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. After the meeting, Clinton fumed: “Who the f**k does he think he is? Who’s the f**king superpower here?”

Biden proudly called himself a lifelong “Zionist” and embraced Israel generously, diplomatically, and militarily after the Hamas-led massacres on October 7, 2023. Still, Biden and Netanyahu kept clashing over military strategy.

Wanting Israel to win, but worried that Israel would lose its good name, Biden became increasingly apoplectic. In July 2024, when Israel bombed Beirut, eliminating Fuad Shukur, a leading Hezbollah commander responsible for killing 12 Israeli-Druze children in Majdal Shams, Biden confronted Israel’s prime minister. “Bibi, what the f**k?” the president bellowed, according to Bob Woodward’s 2024 book, War. “You know the perception of Israel around the world increasingly is that you’re a rogue state, a rogue actor.”

Woodward reports Biden also vented to aides Clinton-style, calling Netanyahu “a bad f**king guy!” and a “f**king liar.” Although these assaults were more personal, the rubber band snapped back quickly. Biden didn’t abandon Israel or Bibi – despite growing pressure from other Democrats.

Trump’s outburst was just a chapter in their relationship

IN THAT CONTEXT, Trump’s outburst, asking “What the f**k are you doing?” in June 2026, was just another chapter in a long, complex, ongoing story of a special relationship led by strong-minded leaders whose agendas will occasionally clash. Last month, Trump sought a diplomatic formula with Iran, while Netanyahu doubted Iran’s intentions. 

Justifiably defending his country’s interests after Hezbollah renewed its attacks against Israel, Netanyahu approved strikes on Beirut and southern Lebanon. Trump, protecting the negotiations he still had faith in then, called Netanyahu “f**king crazy,” claiming Bibi had “no f**king judgment.”

Now, just weeks later, after hysterical cries of “rupture” on both sides of the Atlantic, and Iran’s Strait of Hormuz power play, Netanyahu and Trump seem to share a deep distrust of Iran’s leaders.

My latest e-book, The Essential Guide to the US-Israel Partnership: The 250th anniversary edition, brands Israel America’s rare DIY (Defend It Yourself) ally, and ROI (Return on Investment) ally, generating many technological, medical, cultural, diplomatic, and military dividends for the United States. But the book also traces how every president, including such “pro-Israel” stalwarts like Reagan, inevitably clashed at some point with their Israeli counterparts.

Today, with anti-Zionist obsessives like New York’s Mayor Zohran Mamdani demonizing Israel constantly, the occasional presidential F-bomb seems downright mild – and flattering. Similarly, with European diplomats claiming over the years: “All the current troubles in the world are because of that shitty little country, Israel,” or that the “f**king Israelis” should be “wiped off the face of the earth,” it’s clear how bonded America is with Israel and how most Americans are with Israelis.  

Mark Twain understood the joy and power of a good tirade filled with expletives. In Pudd’nhead Wilson, he advised: “When angry, count [to] four; when very angry, swear.” That’s because, Twain explained elsewhere, “Under certain circumstances, urgent circumstances, desperate circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.”

More elegantly, Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who won the Nobel Peace Prize, taught: “The opposite of love is not hate; it’s indifference.” 

It’s impossible to predict if Trump and Netanyahu embraced warmly or crossed swords yet again. But it is highly unlikely that their encounter lacked great drama or reflected a dismissive indifference.

The writer is a distinguished scholar of North American history at McGill University, and a senior research fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute. He is the author of nine books on presidential history and, more recently, To Resist the Academic Intifada: Letters to my students on defending the Zionist dream, as well as his latest e-book, The Essential Guide to the US-Israel Partnership: The 250th anniversary edition.

This post was originally published on here. 

For many native New Yorkers like myself, the City (as we always refer to New York) has become unrecognizable – not because of the look of the place, but because of the feel of the place. What was the celebrated melting pot, crossroads, and great amalgam of humanity has become a vitriolic, ideological, and resentful place.

New York was famous for being welcoming and accepting. If there was an ideology behind it, it was live and let live, and together we can all do pretty darn well.

New Yorkers were practical and proudly seeking to “make it there.” There was no hatred of the rich, but rather a hope that each of us could end up the same way.

This mindset was well exemplified by mayor Mike Bloomberg, who resisted raising the City’s income tax rate because, as he pointed out, some 5,000 individual taxpayers accounted for something close to the City’s tax payments. These were people who had choices and could go anywhere. Why drive them out of the City?

So the soak-the-rich underpinnings of the recent Mamdani campaign, and what is implicit in some of his bound-to-go-nowhere proposals, is completely counter to what helped make New York New York.

The Marxist ideology animating the City’s new administration is just the opening act of inversion. The truly breathtakingly adverse and self-destructive attribute of the new New York is its galloping jihadism and sanctioned anti-Israel hatred, a fig leaf for classic antisemitism.

The love affair of the City with its Jewish residents is over. The spirit, character, humor, and creativity that moved seamlessly back and forth between Jews in New York and their fellow residents has morphed into resentment, suspicion, and a none-too-well-disguised desire to have Jews be quiet – or even better, be gone.

The situation is disruptive and disconcerting for Jewish New Yorkers. But it is equally if not even more disturbing for those of us who ascertain the amazing fall from grace that has taken place in New York.

This is because we can sense that the travails of New York are nothing short of a shot across the bow for a malignancy that, unless forcefully encountered, is likely to spread throughout America.

The spirit of NY

All of Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s hatred for Israel and, by extension, Jews, is matched by his hatred of America itself. It is a hatred of the values and the ethos that built and has sustained America. It is resentment for achievement, for success and for an accepting way of life.

The common thread in the resentment of Mamdani and his fellow travelers linking Jew hatred and capitalism hatred is the aversion to success. America has too much wealth, Israel has grown to be a successful, even dominant, power in its region, there are too many who have too much, and somehow they are preventing me and my cohorts from having what we deserve.

If New York can be personified through its mayors, the contrast between Mamdani and his predecessors is staggering. Picture Mamdani next to Ed Koch, Rudolph Giuliani, or Michael Bloomberg, and see the jaw-dropping differences.

Whatever their individual successes or drawbacks, these mayors loved their City and wanted all boats to rise in a rising tide. There was zero interest or desire to play New Yorkers off or against each other.

The City was greater than the sum of its parts, but the parts were what made New York so amazing.

In the short term and in a narrow sense, Mamdani may well get his desires to come true. New York will be increasingly Israel-phobic and Jew averse. Resentment is likely to become the driving spirit of the City.

Ironically, much as Bloomberg perceived, the Jews of New York will have choices, and many are likely to leave for more hospitable pastures elsewhere. The loser in this, of course, will be the City itself: poorer in substance and spirit.

As New York has always been both unique yet also emblematic among the cities of America, so too will its travail be increasingly seen elsewhere across the country. Marxism has always had its knee-jerk appeal, and when it is being espoused by a smiling and well-dressed spokesman who can dress it up as equity and fairness to millions on social media, it can spread until it collapses under the weight of its own unworkability.

New York is in for a rough ride, and if its malignancy is not seen for what it is, much of America might follow suit. This would be a self-inflicted wound of existential proportions.

I comfort myself with the recognition that New Yorkers have always been able to see through flim flam and hoo hah. I sure hope they can do this once again.

The writer is the chairman of the Board of Im Tirtzu and a director of the Israel Independence Fund.

This post was originally published on here. 

The UN human rights office on Wednesday warned of worsening violence by Israeli settlers in the West Bank and urged international action against the killing of Palestinians as well as the creation of settlements, which it said had reached an all-time high.

According to United Nations figures, 18 Palestinians have been killed in incidents linked to settler attacks so far this year, compared with 17 in the whole of 2025. 

Maj. Yuval Ezra, 27, an Artillery Corps battery commander, and Sgt.-Maj. (res.) Benyahu Mellet, 32, a member of Gilad Farm’s local security team, were killed Friday during a confrontation near the Palestinian village of Tal, southwest of Nablus.

According to the IDF, the incident began after a group of Israeli civilians entered Palestinian Authority-controlled territory and clashed with local residents, during which a Palestinian seized a rifle and opened fire. Palestinian officials said four Palestinians were killed in the broader confrontation, although the circumstances of their deaths remain under investigation.

Ravina Shamdasani, the spokesperson for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said, “settlers and Israeli security forces, often acting together, have attacked local communities, assaulting families, destroying and confiscating property, and burning mosques.”

The UN human rights office said settler violence and actions tantamount to ongoing annexation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank had worsened in the two years since a ruling at the International Court of Justice in July 2024 that Israel’s “occupation” in the West Bank was illegal and should be withdrawn. Israel at the time rejected the finding as “fundamentally wrong” and one-sided.

Violence in West Bank on the rise

Violence in the West Bank has surged since the start of the Gaza war in October 2023, with the UN, rights groups and Palestinian officials reporting a sharp rise in settler attacks.

Earlier in July, the security cabinet approved NIS 1.3b. to establish 34 new settlements. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who advocates for the full annexation of the West Bank, called the move “historic.” UN bodies, Palestinians and most countries view the settlements as illegal under international conventions – a stance disputed by Israel.

Israel cites biblical and historical ties to the land, which it argues is disputed territory, where Jews have lived for thousands of years.

About 700,000 settlers live among 2.7 million Palestinians in the West Bank and east Jerusalem.

Sarah Ben-Nun contributed to this report. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Lebanese Forces are struggling against legal restrictions that prevent them from searching private properties in pilot zones, areas that the military is expected to ensure remain free of Hezbollah as part of a US-brokered agreement between Beirut and Jerusalem, according to Lebanese media reports.

Just over a week since the IDF withdrew from the pilot zones, Lebanese newspaper L’Orient-Le Jour reported that the forces are struggling to fulfill their responsibility as they currently lack the legal right to inspect private property. Without such a right, it is unclear how the Lebanese Army can ensure that the zones remain free of Hezbollah’s weapons.

Lebanese law states that a person’s place of residence is sacred 

Article 14 of the Lebanese Constitution establishes the inviolability of the home. It states that a person’s place of residence is sacred and that no one may enter it except under the specific circumstances and procedures prescribed by law, such as when a judicial warrant has been issued, during emergencies, or in the interest of public safety.

Hezbollah, its supporters, and some individuals concerned with state authority have invoked Article 14 to challenge the search. However, Lebanese media reported that many consider the exceptional circumstances facing the country as a reason to justify extending the military’s authority.

Prosecutor Ahmad al-Hajj told the site that “So far, I have not issued any decision authorizing the search of any private residence,” and that in many areas, few buildings remain intact enough to hold Hezbollah weapons.

“I am waiting for the information that the army will provide me with. If a search is requested, it will require prior authorization from the prosecution, granted only on the basis of serious evidence indicating the presumed presence of weapons. The intelligence must be solid,” he said.

Though Hajj asserted that there must be serious evidence before searches can take place, the IDF regularly found weapons like missile launchers hidden in homes in southern Lebanon. Only three weeks ago, the Israeli military announced it confiscated RPG ammunition, anti-tank missiles, vests, helmets, and Hezbollah terrorist organization flags from a home in the village of Tallousa.

Constitutional law expert and former minister Adnan Sayyed Hussein added that “During each search operation, the mukhtar [local elected official] as well as the owner of the property must be present.”

Displacement proves a difficult barrier to searching buildings

Given that around 20% of Lebanon’s population was displaced during the peak of the war, according to UN figures, requiring a property owner’s presence to search the building might prove difficult.

“There is no question of searching every house. We have no interest in carrying out systematic searches. If the army were to inspect a large number of homes without finding anything, it would be seen as a failure and would undermine its credibility,” Hajj said.

Justice Minister Adel Nassar told the site that “While the principle of the inviolability of the home must be upheld, the law also prohibits the possession of military equipment inside a private residence. The Constitution entrusts the supreme command of the armed forces to the president and does not recognize any parallel military structure. This principle was reaffirmed by the Cabinet.”

The legal restrictions preventing searches of private property are not the first issue raised regarding the Lebanese Armed Forces’ ability to police the pilot zones. On Tuesday, The Jerusalem Post reported on the continued presence of Hezbollah’s civil arms in the municipalities from which Israel withdrew last week.

Hezbollah’s Islamic Health Organization has continued operating in Zawtar al-Gharbiyah and was recorded working alongside the Lebanese military to collect the bodies of Hezbollah terrorists killed during the conflict.

Though civilian in appearance, Hezbollah’s Islamic Health Organization operates under the terror group’s Executive Council and serves as its medical corps during operational activities. The organization’s personnel and infrastructure have also served a dual purpose during the war, with operatives and weapons allegedly transported in ambulances and Hezbollah operation centers constructed within clinics.

Dr. Moran Levanoni, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies, explained to the Post that while Hezbollah’s civil arms were not restricted under the agreement, their continued presence poses legitimate security risks, including the potential for espionage or the use of facilities as a front to enable the terror group’s return.

This post was originally published on here. 

The British Medical Association (BMA) is calling on National Health Service England to immediately pause the implementation of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism across NHS organizations, pending legal opinion.

The call follows a motion passed at the BMA’s Annual Representative Meeting in June 2026, calling for an investigation into the use of the definition, arguing that it may restrict free expression by healthcare workers.

In a letter to the chief executive of NHS England, Sir Jim Mackey, the BMA pointed out that there is no legal requirement on NHS organizations to adopt the IHRA definition. Yet trusts have been strongly encouraged to implement it and report back to NHS England by the end of July 2026.

In the letter, the BMA argues the rollout is moving forward without proper assessment of its practical and legal implications for employers and staff, and without clear guidance on how it should be applied. The BMA is therefore calling for a pause to the rollout, pending proper safeguards being put in place, consultation, and legal advice.

The letter also points to a legal opinion from four senior lawyers, commissioned and circulated to trust chief executives by law firm Leigh Day, which sets out the risks facing NHS England and individual employers if the definition is adopted without adequate safeguards.

Health Workers 4 Palestine demand IHRA’s antisemitism definition to be dropped

The Leigh Day advisory opinion was commissioned by Health Workers 4 Palestine.

The Leigh Day lawyers said that antisemitism is already prohibited by the Equality Act 2010, and that the IHRA definition creates “difficult questions for NHS organizations at a time when many healthcare workers are expressing concern about Israel’s conduct in Gaza.”

BMA’s deputy chair of Council Dr. Emma Runswick cited this opinion, adding that “NHS staff must be able to work in environments free from harassment and be able to engage in legitimate political and ethical debate.”

“We urge any hospital trust that has already adopted the definition to review its safeguards and pause if these are found lacking.”

The BMA wants to discuss its concerns with NHS England urgently and in the letter, asks NHS England to confirm that the implementation timetable will be paused.

Antisemitism reported in the NHS

This comes only months after the publication of the UK government advisor on antisemitism Lord John Mann’s review of antisemitism in the NHS.

As part of the review, Mann heard that Jewish people in the NHS experience “routine ostracism,” with Jewish staff being the only religious group in the latest NHS Staff Survey for whom discrimination from colleagues is rising rather than falling, resulting in some considering leaving the NHS.

He found that antisemitism extends to patients, too, as some Jewish patients reported they did not wish to present for treatment or put off receiving important care.

“It is well-evidenced that racism is persistent in the NHS,” Mann said, adding that “the case for taking action to combat antisemitism and other forms of racism in the NHS is clear.”

This post was originally published on here. 

A Montreal Jewish family was targeted with antisemitic abuse at La Fontaine Park on Sunday evening while spending the day with extended family members who were visiting.

The incident began when the father approached a woman walking two dogs in the children’s playground area and calmly pointed out that dogs were not allowed. In response, the woman launched an expletive-filled rant caught on video telling him in French: “Jews aren’t allowed here” and asking, “Is that a law? Don’t give me that bullsh*t.”

Following the initial interaction, the father called the police. The recorded video footage, which was later circulated on social media, showed the woman subsequently returning to confront him, asking, “Are you trying to scare me or something? That’s called intimidation,” and demanding to know his neighborhood.

When the father replied that he did not want to interact with her and that the police were on their way, the woman shouted, “Do you think I am not allowed with my dog in this park?”

‘Your kids are f*cked up because they don’t f*cking go to a normal school’

After the father pointed to a nearby sign showing dogs were banned under threat of a $300 fine, the woman told him to mind his own business and added, “Your kids are f*cked up because they don’t f*cking go to a normal school, so don’t tell me what to do.”

In Canada, people now openly proclaim “Jews aren’t allowed here” https://t.co/D3btuIPdnP

— Aviva Klompas (@AvivaKlompas) July 29, 2026

According to reporting by the Rebel News site, the confrontation began at approximately 6:45 p.m. after the family’s children were frightened by the dogs inside the water fountain area of the playground, where a clear sign posted nearby indicated dogs were prohibited.

The outlet reported that the family waited over an hour for police to respond before they left, and filed a formal police report on Monday.

Rebel News noted that they spoke with the father following the incident. He said he was shocked by the woman’s response and noted that members of the Jewish community were increasingly growing accustomed to daily occurrences of such hatred. Montreal police confirmed to the outlet that they were contacted and were investigating whether charges should be placed against the woman.

Following the publication of the video online, social media users identified the woman involved as Montreal interior designer Brigitte Doyon.

This post was originally published on here. 

Lebanon’s president said on Tuesday, alongside US President Donald Trump in Washington, that his country’s ultimate objective is to end the state of hostility with Israel once and for all.

The statement – made during the first White House visit by a Lebanese president since 2009 – capped a months-long process in which Joseph Aoun publicly called for direct negotiations with Israel so the Lebanese could “live in peace.”
On June 26, the two countries signed a US-brokered framework for “lasting peace and security,” which Aoun called historic.

Many Israelis have yet to recognize the historic change unfolding in Lebanon – a change made possible largely by Hezbollah’s decline, which until recently held Lebanon in its grip, has lost its longtime leader, much of its military strength, revenue, and political influence, as well as its strategic depth in Syria.

One result was Aoun’s election in January 2025, after a two-year presidential vacancy prolonged largely by Hezbollah’s obstruction. His election demonstrated that Hezbollah could no longer impose its preferred candidate or veto one it had once considered unacceptable.

Aoun did not merely inherit this moment. During his years as commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces, he built close ties with the United States and key European governments, on which both the military and the wider Lebanese state depend heavily. Under Lebanon’s sectarian system, the presidency is reserved for a Maronite Christian.

Aoun’s victory a cause for US optimism

Aoun’s election, facilitated in part by strong Saudi involvement, generated considerable optimism amid the devastation left by the war. Washington shared that optimism, praising his “courage and vision.”

Aoun remains cautious. The 2005 assassination of Rafic Hariri – for which a UN-backed tribunal convicted a Hezbollah operative – demonstrated the risks faced by Lebanese politicians who challenge the organization.

That history helps explain both his refusal to meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the calibrated manner in which he has confronted Hezbollah: challenging its dominance without seeking to exclude it entirely from politics or provoke an uncontrolled showdown.

Hezbollah still retains the ability to intimidate Lebanon’s political institutions, though far less effectively than before. Aoun must also avoid appearing to replace subordination to Iranian dictates with subordination to Israeli demands.

Even so, Aoun has gone further than any Lebanese president in recent decades. He has opposed Hezbollah and Iranian interference, supported dialogue with Israel, and begun translating those positions into action.

The Lebanese Armed Forces remain limited and far from fully effective, but under his leadership they are doing more than before to restore the state’s monopoly on armed force. This progress has been made possible primarily by Hezbollah’s weakness, but also by Aoun’s policy and direction.

Aoun’s caution should not be mistaken for reluctance. The devastation of the war has created an opportunity to loosen Hezbollah’s grip on Lebanon, and Aoun appears determined to guide the country through that transition.

Political necessity and Aoun’s own convictions now point in the same direction: ending Hezbollah’s domination. He understands the price Lebanon has paid for allowing an Iranian militia to operate on its soil. He also recognizes that significant sections of the public – particularly within the Christian community – are weary of Hezbollah and years of war.

That sentiment gives him room to pursue an alternative course. His challenge is to steer Lebanon forward while contending with an armed organization that still enjoys significant support among Lebanese Shi’ites. 

None of this makes Aoun master of Lebanon. Hezbollah remains armed, politically entrenched, and capable of obstructing – or violently derailing – the process. Yet so far, Aoun has moved in the right direction.

Israel and and the US should act on this opportunity. Across the border is a Lebanese leader willing to take political risks in defense of his country’s interests – and to make that case publicly to his own people, in Arabic, rather than only before an American audience in Washington. Aoun’s course also aligns with Israel’s strategic interests: advancing peace with Lebanon and dismantling Hezbollah’s military power.

One of the understandable lessons Israelis drew from October 7 was to take their enemies’ declared intentions seriously. But strategic vigilance also requires recognizing when a different possibility begins to emerge.

The road to peace with Lebanon – and to Hezbollah’s disarmament – remains long, difficult, and uncertain. Yet for the first time in years, Israel may have a potential partner in Beirut.

Aoun is no Sadat, and Lebanon is not Egypt in the late 1970s. But history rarely repeats itself in identical form. With the right strategy, Aoun could become both a genuine partner for peace and an important force in restoring Lebanese sovereignty.

Israel and the United States should therefore combine incentives with pressure. Israel should undertake phased, verifiable withdrawals wherever the Lebanese Armed Forces establish effective control.

Washington should sustain military and economic assistance conditioned on measurable progress toward the state’s monopoly on arms.

Both countries should maintain pressure on Hezbollah while avoiding steps that publicly humiliate Aoun or allow his opponents to portray him as Israel’s instrument. In the Middle East, opportunities rarely remain open for long. Israel and the United States should seize this one before Hezbollah closes it.

The writer is a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI). In the Israeli Defense Intelligence, he served as head of the Hezbollah and Lebanon Branch (2022–2024) and later as senior adviser to the director of IDI (2024–2026).

This post was originally published on here. 

New episodes every Sunday-Thursday. 

Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

For more news, analysis, and the latest updates, head to jpost.com.

Headlines edited by Corinne Baum. 

Hosted and produced by Shifra Jacobs.

This post was originally published on here. 

The IDF detained three Israeli activists from the “HaBashan Pioneers” settler movement after they breached the Syrian border in the Mount Hermon area on Tuesday, the military announced on Wednesday.

However, an earlier report from Army Radio said the activists were only in Syrian territory for several hours on Wednesday morning before being located by the IDF.

The activists were returned to Israeli territory and handed over to police, the IDF said, noting that the military “strongly condemns” such incidents as they disrupt operations and create a dangerous situation for all involved.

The IDF emphasized that police are required to pursue justice for the activists’ “criminal offense” in order to disincentivize further similar actions.

The incident marks the fourth recent attempt (successful or unsuccessful) for the settler activist group to cross into Syria.

The HaBashan Pioneers have been trying to establish Jewish settlements in Syria, with several arrested in recent weeks for multiple separate border crossing attempts.

A recent unsuccessful border breach, following a reported drone targeting  

Most recently, HaBashan Pioneers activists attempted to breach the Syrian border on July 22, with the IDF detaining the activists prior to successfully reaching the Syrian Hermon. 

On July 21, five HaBashan Pioneers members were targeted by IDF Elbit Hermes 450 “Zik” drones in the Israel-Syria border area before being identified as Israelis, according to a KAN News report.

This post was originally published on here. 

US Central Command said overnight that US and Saudi forces had struck Iran-backed terrorists in Iraq. The Iranian-backed militias in Iraq had been targeting Saudi Arabia over the last several days from July 26 to July 28.

The militias have targeted Saudi Arabia numerous times during the last six months. They have also targeted the Kingdom since 2019. Riyadh has often chosen not to respond, opting to err on the side of de-escalation. Now, with US backing, the Kingdom is sending a message. It won’t tolerate this any longer.

US Central Command said that American forces and “the Saudi Arabian Armed Forces conducted precision strikes in Iraq, July 28, against Iran-aligned terrorists that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) directed to attack US forces and Saudi energy infrastructure.”

The US noted that American and Saudi aircraft “struck multiple terrorist logistics and weapons sites across eastern Iraq in a strong response to over 30 IRGC-directed aerial drone attacks in the last 72 hours.”

Clearly, Iran has mobilized its militias to attack the Kingdom in the days after the US stopped strikes on Iran. It’s worth recalling that tensions between the US and Iran grew earlier this month. Then the US carried out 13 days of strikes on Iran before pausing them on July 26.

Iran increases support of hostile militias

Meanwhile, Iran began trying to increase support to the Houthis in Yemen. On July 13, the Houthis accused Riyadh of an attack on Sana’a airport. On July 21, the Houthis announced a naval blockade targeting Saudi Arabia and began attacks on ships in the Red Sea.

This was followed by the attacks from Iraq on Saudi Arabia, intending to create a two-front war on Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia and the US coordinated a response over the last days. CENTCOM said that “From February through April 2026, there were more than 600 attempted attacks on US citizens and facilities by Iran-aligned terrorist militias in Iraq.

The IRGC and its terrorist proxies must cease these attacks to avoid further US military response.” The militias in Iraq have targeted the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and also Jordan, Kuwait, and other countries.

In recent days, they increased attacks on Erbil in the Kurdistan Region of northern Iraq. Militias in Nineveh plains near Mosul targeted Erbil, according to Kurdistan Regional authorities.

It’s important to understand the history of US-Saudi Arabia ties. US-Saudi relations developed into a strategic partnership during the twentieth century, particularly after President Franklin D. Roosevelt met Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz aboard the USS Quincy in 1945.

The relationship combined American interest in regional stability and energy resources alongside Saudi focus on external threats. During the Cold War, both countries opposed Soviet influence and revolutionary movements in the Middle East.

They backed the rebellion in Afghanistan against the Soviets. Cooperation deepened after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, when Saudi Arabia hosted US forces.

Relations faced strains after the September 11 attacks, the Iraq War, and disagreements over the Iran deal.

Now relations between the US and Saudi Arabia are clearly back.

This is part of the Trump administration’s doctrine. US President Donald Trump has made Saudi Arabia among his first foreign trips during his two terms.

He cemented ties with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. Riyadh has suffered from the recent Iran war, having to shift oil exports. Riyadh has been quick to do this. It has also been willing to confront the Houthis.

Iraq-Saudi relations improve as Iranian relations deteriorate

Saudi Arabia had patched things up with Iraq over the last several years.

It had also been more open to China and had moved forward with a ceasefire in Yemen since 2022. As such, Saudi Arabia was willing to also consider better relations with Iran.

Riyadh has shifted its policies over the last decade from dealing with threats and crises with various countries, such as Iran and Turkey, to working more closely with many of these states.

However, the Iranians have shown that they will still use their militias to target Saudi Arabia. This has been one of the features of the recent war.

As such, Saudi Arabia wants to send a message that it will work closely with the US to coordinate strikes.

The current round of strikes is unprecedented in terms of sending a clear public message that Saudi Arabia and the US are going to work together militarily. This builds on the last decades of training and cooperation.

The joint strikes were also highlighted in Riyadh. Saudi Arabia’s defense ministry also said it had struck Iran. The official spokesman for the ministry, Maj.-Gen. Turki Al-Malki claimed terrorists had attacked Saudi Arabia from Iraq.

He said the Kingdom has a right to defend itself. Arab News in Saudi Arabia noted that Maj. Gen. Turki Al-Malki “affirmed the Kingdom’s inherent right to defend itself and its assets, as well as its right to respond at the appropriate time and place.”

The report noted that “Saudi Arabia’s foreign affairs ministry, in a statement, stated that this ‘aggressive approach adopted by the Iran-affiliated terrorist militias in Iraq came at a time when the Kingdom was exerting efforts to contribute to ending the escalation in the region, in a manner that preserves its security and stability.’”

The ministry went on to add that “these Iran-affiliated terrorist militias chose the irresponsible escalatory approach, the violation of international law, and the disregard for what Islamic brotherhood requires in terms of adhering to the principles of good neighborliness.”

The Saudis noted that drones have been launched from Iraq targeting oil facilities in Saudi Arabia’s eastern province.

In Iraq, video showed the aftermath of the US and Saudi strikes. The Iranian-backed militias affiliated with the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) said, “These attacks resulted in the martyrdom of a number of personnel and injuries to others, as well as material damage to several buildings and properties.”

The attacks come as Iraq’s new prime minister was visiting Turkey and on his way back to Iraq. He had visited the US and Iran over the last weeks. He was also going to visit Saudi Arabia.

Riyadh is asserting itself in the region. It is showing that the US-Saudi alliance is ironclad and that Riyadh will contribute military assets to fight against Iranian-backed terrorist groups.

Most of the militias in Iraq are labeled Foreign Terrorist Organizations by the US. The US is also showing that it will help Saudi Arabia protect its northern border with Iraq. 

This post was originally published on here. 

The Green-led Hackney Council voted on Tuesday night to approve a motion initiating the formal process to end its decades-long twinning relationship with the Israeli city of Haifa. The decision follows a Green Party majority victory in the May local elections.

Hackney’s twinning agreement with Haifa was established in 1968 in a spirit of working-class solidarity, bringing multi-faith and multi-ethnic cooperation centered around medical links. Previous efforts by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) to sever the ties had been rejected under the prior Labour administration. However, following the local elections, the newly dominant Green Party pursued the measure as part of its manifesto pledges, citing international legal arguments regarding the ongoing conflict.

Hackney mayor defends the move as consistent with town’s values

During the council meeting, proponents of the motion argued that maintaining institutional links was inconsistent with human rights and international law. Hackney Mayor Zoë Garbett defended the move as a delivery on manifesto commitments to ensure institutional relationships are consistent with “our values and commitment to human rights, international law, justice, and international solidarity.”

Conversely, opposition councilors argued that Haifa is a progressive, diverse city that serves as a model of coexistence. Councilor Simche Steinberger criticized the decision during the debate, pointing out that Haifa features “the only hospital in the entire Israel which you have connection and only because of the twinning” and noted that “the Green Party is the second biggest party in the council there.”

Demonstrator seen throwing eggs at reporter

Video footage shared online captured at a PSC-organized demonstration outside Hackney Town Hall, during the council meeting, showed a demonstrator throwing an egg at a reporter outside the building.

On all four occasions that Our Fight campaigners have protested outside Hackney Town Hall in the last two and a half years, someone in our group has been attacked. And last night—outside the vote to de-twin Hackney from Haifa—was no exception.

A woman with her face covered… pic.twitter.com/ZvWZBWuw2x

— OurFightUk (@OurFightUk) July 29, 2026

In response to the outcome, Phil Rosenberg, President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, condemned the decision immediately following the vote via an official statement posted on social media, stating: “Tonight, the Hackney Green Party showed its ignorance and bigotry. Haifa is a diverse city, widely seen as a model of ethnic and religious coexistence. The city is led by a progressive mayor and its council includes representatives from Green, Arab and Communist parties. If the Hackney Greens had any genuine interest in peace they would celebrate Haifa, not censure it. This vote represents the prioritization of spite over sense.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he was not afraid of landing in a country that would enforce the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants during an interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity broadcast on Wednesday.

“You travel internationally. God forbid you had a medical emergency, and you need to land, and you’re about to land in a country that recognizes the ICC – it could complicate things. Do you worry about that?” Hannity asked.

“Yeah, I think about it. We have special forces. You know, I served with them for five years… let’s give them a new task,” Netanyahu responded.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

One of the new developments in the recent conflict with Iran has been that Iran and its militias have increasingly targeted the Kingdom of Jordan. This has included ballistic missile attacks and also drone threats to the country. Americans have been killed in these attacks.

In the most recent incident overnight on July 28-29, Jordan was forced to contend with new missile threats. The Associated Press noted that “Jordan’s air defenses intercepted five missiles launched from Iran early Wednesday, the country’s military said, hours after the US military said it had knocked down an Iranian missile barrage launched against American forces in the Middle East, shattering a brief pause in fighting.” The Jordanian military said it had intercepted and destroyed the missiles. Iranian state media said that the IRGC had targeted the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base. It also claimed to have targeted a US Central Command site in Jordan.

In the past, Iran and Iranian-backed militias have also targeted other sites in eastern Jordan. One of the sites is called Tower 22. In January 2024, the Kataib Hezbollah militia in Iraq struck this site with drones and killed three American service members. Thus, Iran has seen Jordan as a potential frontline for years. It appears that Iran feels Jordan can be attacked and that the Kingdom is less likely to respond than the Gulf. It may see Jordan as a kind of soft underbelly of Western allies in the region. Iran has not attacked Israel, for instance. It has preferred to strike at Jordan.

Jordan and Israel have long been linked by history and ties. Once part of the Ottoman Empire, both countries were briefly united under British control after the First World War. Then the Kingdom became a separate mandatory entity under British rule.

The Kingdom of Jordan has maintained close ties with Britain and the West since its creation in the aftermath of the First World War. Transjordan emerged from the British Mandate system in the early 1920s under Abdullah I, a member of the Hashemite family that had cooperated with Britain during the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire. British officers helped organize and train the Arab Legion, which became one of the region’s most professional military forces.

Jordan gained independence in 1946, but its relationship with Britain and the West remained important. During the Cold War, the monarchy increasingly became a key Western partner in the region. King Hussein, who ruled from 1952 until 1999, navigated threats from neighboring states and Palestinian terrorist groups and was close with Britain and the United States. Israel and Jordan had various levels of contact since the 1940s. This culminated in a peace deal in 1994.

Jordan sits at crossroads of broader Mideast conflict, vulnerable to spillover

Jordan is a monarchy and close to the Gulf. It is also tied to Syria through cultural and clan ties in northern Jordan. As such, it sits in a precarious position, at the crossroads of the region. It has always tried to hedge this, for instance during the Gulf War when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. It has always known the Kingdom is vulnerable to spillover from regional conflicts. This has happened frequently in the past.

The United States gradually became Jordan’s most important Western supporter, providing extensive economic and military assistance. Under King Abdullah II, who succeeded Hussein in 1999, Jordan has remained a close US and Western security partner. Its strategic position between Israel, Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia has made the kingdom particularly important in counterterrorism, regional diplomacy and Western military strategy.

Jordan has been doing outreach in Europe during the recent round of attacks. “Jordan’s Crown Prince Hussein and senior government and military officials held meetings on Tuesday with French Minister Delegate for the Armed Forces and Veterans Alice Rufo to discuss defense cooperation and regional developments,” Arab News noted on July 28.

The report added that “the crown prince warned of the deteriorating situation in the occupied West Bank, calling for greater international efforts to halt the escalation, and highlighted the need to achieve comprehensive calm across the region.”

Meanwhile, on July 27, the Jordanians also had to confront drone threats. “The Royal Jordanian Air Force intercepted and shot down a drone that breached Jordanian airspace early Tuesday, the Jordanian Armed Forces-Arab Army said,” Jordan’s Petra News Agency noted. “The military’s official spokesperson said the drone was detected through the Armed Forces’ surveillance and monitoring system before being brought down in the eastern desert inside Jordanian territory, in accordance with the approved rules of engagement.”

It remains to be seen if Jordan will join the US in responding, the way the Saudis have done. The Kingdom has chosen to remain quiet during this conflict, despite being increasingly targeted. 

This post was originally published on here. 

US President Donald Trump stated that the US will “beat the f***ing s***” out of Iran in retaliation for Tehran’s overnight launch of ballistic missiles towards US military bases in the region, in comments reportedly made to Fox News reporter Trey Yingst on Wednesday. 

“We’ll be hitting them hard,” Trump continued, according to Yingst.

Trump described Iran’s strikes as a surprise attack, allegedly telling Yingst that US forces had mere minutes to intercept the incoming Iranian missiles.

“We’re going to beat the fuc*ing sh*t out of them,” President Trump told Fox News after Iran launched a surprise attack against U.S. forces. “We’ll be hitting them hard.”

The President says U.S. strikes overnight against Iran-backed militias in Iraq were coordinated with the… pic.twitter.com/AeLbEGFCFi

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) July 29, 2026

Earlier on Wednesday, Iranian state media claimed that the US struck in West Azerbaijan, Iran.

Iran’s state TV, citing an official, claimed that a US projectile hit Iran’s northwestern city of Piranshahr.

No casualties were reported.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

DAMASCUS – As the deadline for exchanging banknotes issued during the rule of former president Bashar Assad approaches, the Central Bank of Syria says around 80% of the old currency has been exchanged since the beginning of the year. 

The transition introduces a new Syrian pound, with two zeros removed from the old currency’s face value: 100 old pounds are exchanged for one new pound. The process goes beyond replacing old notes with newly issued Syrian pounds, raising broader questions about national identity, confidence in the Syrian pound, and the country’s economic future.

Currency is more than a means of daily exchange. The images and symbols printed on banknotes often reflect the identity of the state and the political era in which they were issued. Syrians therefore regard the withdrawal of notes bearing Assad’s image as a symbolic break with a chapter that has ended.

Replacing notes bearing Assad’s portrait carries symbolic importance

Syrian researcher Mohammad Jamal Tahan told The Media Line that placing leaders’ images on currency has historically been a way to display authority and reinforce a leader’s presence in everyday life. He said the old currency had become associated with a president whom many Syrians hold responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people during the conflict. Replacing notes bearing Assad’s portrait therefore carries symbolic importance during the country’s political transition, he explained.

Throughout its history, the Syrian currency has reflected the political changes the country has experienced. The names, images, and symbols appearing on banknotes changed as governments shifted and concepts of national identity evolved.

But a redenomination and redesign do not, by themselves, make a currency stronger. The Syrian pound’s value will continue to depend on economic stability, domestic production, and confidence in financial institutions.

Central Bank of Syria Governor Safwat Raslan told The Media Line that the deadline for exchanging the old banknotes is July 30, and that they will cease to be legal tender beginning July 31. After that date, they will no longer be legally valid for commercial transactions or the settlement of financial obligations.

Raslan said approximately 80% of the old Syrian currency had been exchanged since the process began at the start of the year, leaving about one-fifth outside official exchange channels.

He said the formal withdrawal period would begin on July 31 and remain open for five years. Applications will be handled exclusively at the Central Bank’s headquarters in Damascus, the only authorized location for receiving withdrawal requests.

Under the announced procedures, each application must include at least 100 banknotes, regardless of denomination. Requests involving fewer than 100 notes will not be accepted.

Following inspection and approval, the corresponding value will be transferred in newly issued Syrian pounds to a bank account designated by the applicant.

Raslan said the withdrawal process would not be subject to commissions, fees, taxes, or other charges. He urged Syrians to rely only on official channels for information and to avoid rumors and unofficial sources.

Old notes will no longer be usable in markets beginning July 31

The decision means that old notes will no longer be usable in markets beginning July 31. Their holders will, however, retain the right to recover their value from the Central Bank during the following five years, subject to the stated conditions.

Limiting the process to Damascus and requiring a minimum of 100 banknotes could create difficulties for people with small amounts of cash and residents of distant provinces.

In Damascus markets, reactions have been mixed. Some people see the new Syrian pound as the beginning of a new era, while others say changing the currency will have little effect unless it is accompanied by higher incomes and greater price and exchange-rate stability.

Bahjat Daqdouq, a Damascus resident, told The Media Line that replacing the currency had become unavoidable because of the weakness of the old pound and the political symbols printed on it.

“We want to see real strength in the new currency, rather than the process being limited to replacing banknotes,” he said. “So far, the exchange rate has not changed. One US dollar is still worth around 13,000 [old] Syrian pounds, which is an extremely high figure.”

The new notes are issued in denominations ranging from 10 to 500 pounds, reducing the number of bills needed for many everyday purchases without, by itself, changing purchasing power. Abu Hassan al-Kuwa, who owns a grocery store in Damascus, told The Media Line that the new currency had made payments easier. “In the past, shoppers had to carry large quantities of banknotes to buy their basic needs,” he said. “Today, they can replace them with a much smaller bundle. That has had a positive psychological effect on both buyers and sellers.”

Economists say replacing banknotes could help regulate the money supply, combat counterfeiting, and bring some cash circulating outside the banking sector back into official channels.

Abdel Azim al-Maghribel, an economist, told The Media Line that the pound’s value is determined not by its design or the symbols printed on it, but by confidence in the economy and the state’s ability to control spending, stimulate production, and attract investment.

“The new currency can be part of an economic reform process, but it cannot substitute for reform,” he said. “Stabilizing the pound requires a clear monetary policy, fiscal discipline, increased production and exports, and the reconstruction of the banking sector.”

Experiences in Iraq, Turkey, and West Germany show that replacing a currency can help close a political chapter or reorganize a monetary system. In each case, however, success was linked to wider reforms involving inflation control, exchange-rate management, and the rebuilding of economic institutions. 

In Syria, the outcome will be judged by the stability of prices and the exchange rate, the amount of money entering the banking system, public acceptance of the new notes, and whether Syrians regain enough confidence in the pound to use it as a store of value rather than merely a means of daily payment.

As the symbols of the previous era disappear from Syria’s banknotes, the more important question is what follows. The new currency may help the country present a different image of the state, but restoring the pound’s value will depend on the economy’s ability to achieve stability and growth.

Currency can be printed. Trust cannot.

This post was originally published on here. 

A man serving in a classified unit in the IDF was indicted about two weeks ago on suspicion of spying for Iran, the court permitted for publication on Wednesday. 

The suspected charges are contact with a foreign agent and attempted transmission of information liable to benefit the enemy.

Consistent communications with Iranian contact

The investigation, conducted by the Defense Ministry’s Arazim Central Unit and the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), revealed that the suspect was in consistent contact with someone who identified themselves as an Iranian intelligence agent. He was, at one point, asked to aid in looping in another soldier to be in contact with the same foreign intelligence agents as well. 

The security and intelligence agencies warned again on Wednesday against any contact with foreign or unknown agents, urged citizens to report any such connection to authorities, and noted that recruitment attempts take place on social media. They added that they will continue to locate and prosecute crimes of terror and spying.

Attorney Nati Rom, representing the suspect, said that the case at hand was “esoteric” and “at most” included an instance of recklessness. 

“It is tragic that a man who has given his life and paid personal sacrifices for the security of the State of Israel now finds himself indicted on security charges and imprisoned as though he is a Nukhba terrorist,” Rom said.

He added that the suspect certainly did not intend to harm state security, that “it was all just a bad joke,” and that by his reading, the facts at hand don’t add up to the charges.

Around the same time as the indictment was issued, on July 15 the IDF announced separately that a soldier convicted of spying for Iran throughout 2025 was sentenced to five years in prison by a military court. 

He had received messages on Telegram offering him money in exchange for footage of sensitive security information. He sent a video of two rockets being intercepted; the video did not contain any military information nor was it obtained as part of his role. 

This post was originally published on here. 

A Hamas terrorist from east Jerusalem recently threatened to kill MK Zvi Sukkot (Religious Zionist Party) in a private Facebook message after the lawmaker toured Arab schools in the area.

Tarzan Hammad, a 25-year-old Hamas operative from east Jerusalem, sent Sukkot photos of a firearm and ammunition. The message read: “I always have a weapon, I travel without security checks, I will kill you when I see you.”

Following the threat, the Knesset and Israel Police raised Sukkot’s threat level to level 4. Authorities also increased his security and tightened the protective measures surrounding him after conducting a security assessment.

Sukkot received additional threats after touring Arab schools while serving as chairman of the Knesset Education Committee. According to Sukkot, the threatening messages included a photo of a handgun.

“They sent me messages with a picture of a handgun and wrote that they were on their way to kill me. If anyone thinks I will stop overseeing what is happening in the sector because of threats, they are seriously mistaken,” Sukkot said.

The threats were referred to security officials and police, who subsequently decided to raise Sukkot’s threat level and increase his security detail.

Authorities are continuing to investigate the source of the messages and identify those responsible.

Hamas operatives’ messages mark a major escalation in severity of threats

People close to Sukkot said the messages marked a significant escalation in the severity of the threats and that security officials were taking them seriously.

“The violence and crime, together with the stockpiles of illegal weapons in the Arab sector, are an existential threat to the entire State of Israel. The threats only encourage me to continue doing my job and fighting the phenomenon,” Sukkot added.

This post was originally published on here. 

Pro-Palestinian activists involved in targeting Pablo Picasso’s masterpiece Motherhood at the National Gallery have been found guilty of criminal damage. The verdict follows a protest stunt where activists covered the famous artwork with an image related to the conflict in Gaza.  

The incident took place at the National Gallery in London, where two Youth Demand activists approached Pablo Picasso’s 1901 masterpiece Motherhood and taped a graphic poster over its protective glass cover.

The action was organized by the civil resistance group Youth Demand to demand a two-way arms embargo on Israel. Video footage captured security staff rushing to intervene as the protesters affixed the image, immediately pulling the poster down while physical confrontations ensued.

One guard grabbed an activist by his shirt and jacket and rushed him away toward the exit.

As security forced him out, the activist began chanting, “Free, free, Palestine!” Meanwhile, a second demonstrator sat on the floor near the base of the painting and poured red paint across the gallery floor.

‘The UK government is complicit in genocide’

Amid the ensuing commotion in Room 43, the activists shouted statements criticizing government policy, declaring that “The UK government is complicit in genocide.” 

The targeted painting, Picasso’s Motherhood, is a celebrated piece housed within the gallery. The protest action was organized by Youth Demand to draw attention to the humanitarian situation in Gaza and call for a halt to arms sales, with participants issuing statements via social media and group briefings explaining their opposition to government policy regarding the ongoing conflict. 

Legal proceedings subsequently moved forward against the individuals involved in the gallery disruption, culminating in the recent guilty verdicts for criminal damage. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Israel will respond to the striking of an IDF bulldozer overnight Wednesday by a Hezbollah drone, an Israeli source familiar with the matter told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday afternoon. 

The source added that talks were being held as to the nature of the response. 

Earlier in the day, the IDF Northern Command confirmed the overnight strike, which took place in the area of the Ali Taher Ridge, the IDF said, calling it a “blatant violation” of the ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah. 

The site is located at the edge of Israel’s security zone, a highland with a 600-meter elevation in Nabatiya, north of the Litani River.

About a month ago, the IDF said it killed armed Hezbollah operatives there in two separate incidents, after the fighters approached its position in the Ridge. 

In southern Lebanon, IDF troops located over the past few days weapons belonging to Hezbollah, including Kalashnikovs, RPGs, explosives, grenades, and others, the military announced on Wednesday. 

This same process took place at a few locations in the security belt area that troops are operating in. 

The IDF said that in an incident in the area of Ras el-Bayada, located about 10 kilometers north of Rosh Hanikra, troops shot towards a suspect “that approached the forces in a threatening manner,” after the suspect continued to get closer despite calls to stop. The announcement did not give further clarifications. 

The IDF said that in an incident in the area of Ras el-Bayada, located about 10 kilometers north of Rosh Hanikra, troops shot towards a suspect “that approached the forces in a threatening manner,” after the suspect continued to get closer despite calls to stop. The announcement did not give further clarifications. 

Hezbollah tunnels, command center near UNIFIL destroyed by IDF

In Haddatha in the Nabatiya area, troops destroyed an underground route that served as a Hezbollah command center, the IDF announced. It was 55 meters long, contained three rooms, and was about 300 meters away from a UNIFIL building. 

The military added that nearby troops located an underground tunnel shaft that held dozens of weapons. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Persian-language rapper Mahnam Navab Safavi was sentenced to death last week by a Revolutionary Court in Isfahan, according to human rights organizations and diaspora media reports.

The 22-year-old musician was issued the death sentence on the charges of “waging war against God through participation in the destruction of public property,” as well as “propaganda against the establishment” and “assembly and collusion.”

The court heard that Safavi’s destruction of public property was his “writing protest slogans on walls,” according to the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights.

A source told Iran International that Navab Safavi’s two lawyers were refused access to his case file and denied any opportunity to defend him. His trial was also held in absentia, though Safavi remains in Iran, in detention in Isfahan Central Prison.

In December, Safavi’s official social media account made a post where it was declared he intended to join the protests.

Musicians frequently targeted by Islamic Republic

“Until further notice, I, for my part, will be joining the strike and solidarity of the Iranian people, both in real and virtual form, and I will not be active in virtual form,” he wrote.

Musicians have been frequently targeted in the Islamic Republic, even in the years before the January unrest. Toomaj Salehi, an Iranian rapper who frequently sings about social issues plaguing Iran, was issued a death sentence that has now been overturned after he released a song about Mahsa Amini, a young Iranian-Kurdish woman murdered by the regime’s security forces after she was detained for wearing her hijab incorrectly.

More recently, Iranian female singers and the musicians and production team members who support them have been sentenced to flogging for their performances.

Parastoo Ahmadi, a 29-year-old Iranian folk and traditional singer, was sentenced by the Qom Provincial Criminal Court to 74 lashes, a two-year travel ban, and a two-year ban on artistic activities after she and her band were prosecuted for “offending public decency” following the publication of a video on her YouTube channel showing her performing without a hijab.

Anita Papist, a Tehran-based singer, received the same sentence of 74 lashes and confiscation of her passport and phone, solely for posting social media videos of herself singing in English and Persian without a head covering. 

This post was originally published on here.