Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have much to respond to when he stands in front of the United Nations General Assembly’s green marble wall today: a cascade of Palestinian state recognitions by Western countries, a flotilla of activists, influencers and parliamentarians — protected by Spanish and Italian naval ships — and accusations of genocide leveled from the UNGA stage.

On the tarmac at Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesday, Netanyahu vowed to “tell our truth — citizens of Israel, the truth of IDF soldiers, of our state.”

“I will condemn those leaders who, instead of condemning the murderers, rapists and burners of children, want to give them a state in the heart of Israel. This will not happen,” Netanyahu said ahead of his departure from Israel.

Netanyahu also plans on attacking what he perceives as the moral bankruptcy of countries he sees as rewarding the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 attack and casting Israel as a villain. His arrival in New York was accompanied by an advertising campaign launched by his office on billboards and trucks driving around Turtle Bay and Times Square with the message “Remember October 7.”

The signs also feature a QR code that leads to a site depicting the atrocities of that day.

“The goal of the campaign is to remind world leaders and the public about the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas and the unbelievable brutality of the terrorist organization that continues to hold 48 hostages in captivity in Gaza,” Netanyahu’s office said.

Ahead of the speech, Wing of Zion — Israel’s version of Air Force One — took a route that is hundreds of kilometers longer than usual, apparently to avoid the airspace of countries that might act on the International Criminal Court’s warrant for Netanyahu’s arrest. 

Wing of Zion flew from Israel over the Mediterranean to Greek and Italian airspace, and then continued crossing over the Mediterranean until it reached the Atlantic Ocean.

The route was longer than the one he took to the U.S. in July, which overpassed France. A French diplomatic source said that Jerusalem asked Paris for authorization to fly over its airspace, which it provided, but the plane took another route anyway.

After France led the charge in the West to recognize a Palestinian state, Netanyahu was not taking any chances and chose not to rely on the goodwill of those same leaders who days earlier unilaterally recognized a Palestinian state.

Upon his arrival in New York, Netanyahu met with friendlier leaders: President Javier Milei of Argentina, Paraguayan President Santiago Peña and Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić. The readouts from the meetings focused on the theme of Netanyahu’s visit; he thanked the leaders for their “staunch opposition to anti-Israel bias at the United Nations.” 

With Vučić, Netanyahu also discussed Alon Ohel, a dual Israeli-Serbian citizen held hostage by Hamas, which released a video of him this week.

Watching several nationally ambitious Democrats, under pressure from the activist left, shift away from their measured support of Israel is reminiscent of watching the party’s 2020 presidential candidates rush to embrace a panoply of hard-left positions that turned politically costly in the long run. 

The biggest flip-flop under pressure came from former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who, in a recent appearance on the “Pod Save America” podcast, tried to maintain some support for the U.S.-Israel alliance while criticizing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for being responsible for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. 

That nuanced, largely-critical-of-Israel reaction, nonetheless, drew widespread opprobrium from the loudest anti-Israel voices within the party, including the former Obama administration operatives who host the show.

Within days, Buttigieg backtracked in favor of embracing a more hostile view towards the Jewish state. He came out against re-upping another long-term agreement to secure military aid to Israel — the type of deal that former President Barack Obama last secured before leaving office in 2016. He said he would have supported anti-Israel resolutions championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to cut off some military aid to Israel. And he called for recognition of a Palestinian state, a position held by only the furthest-left Democratic lawmakers in Congress.

Buttigieg’s rapid reversal does him little good in advancing his national political interests.  As a presidential candidate whose appeal was centered in his thoughtful pragmatism, his rush to pander to the far flank of his party threatens to undermine his more-moderate brand.  

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), to a lesser extent, is feeling similar pressure from the base as he hints at an interest in presidential politics. The swing-state senator, who has been critical of his party’s far-left, came out squarely against Sanders’ anti-Israel resolutions. But as anti-Israel activists aired an ad in Iowa targeting his position (he missed the actual vote in the Senate), he responded by saying his view on Israel is “evolving.”

And it wasn’t lost on the pro-Israel community that among the 26 Senate Democrats who voted with Sanders on the anti-Israel resolution was Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), a pragmatic Democrat who nonetheless is watching the radical strains within the party grow in influence within her state. Klobuchar is also expected to consider another presidential campaign, after experiencing surprising success in her first run — running as a centrist.

Five years ago, Israel wasn’t driving the left-wing grassroots the same way it is today. Back then, the issues driving the Democratic base were calls to defund the police, protecting illegal immigrants, ending private health insurance in favor of Medicare for All and backing protections for transgender individuals. Other than then-candidate Joe Biden, few of the leading candidates could resist pandering to what looked like an ascendant social justice movement. These issues ended up becoming politically toxic for the party’s image.

In fact, former Vice President Kamala Harris’ biggest impediments as the 2024 Democratic nominee stemmed from the most out-of-the-mainstream positions she adopted in that 2020 primary campaign. 

It’s telling that Democrats who are focused on winning general elections in swing states or districts aren’t following suit with their anti-Israel rhetoric. It’s notable that the Democratic National Committee chairman is feverishly trying to head off an effort from the anti-Israel wing of the party calling for an arms embargo against Israel. 

Even the polling, which has swung against Israel as the war drags on in Gaza, is still evenly divided. By a 13-point margin, voters are still more sympathetic to Israelis than Palestinians, according to a recent Gallup survey. And in a spring survey from the Chicago Council of Global Affairs, Israel received a “50” favorability rating — one that reflects divided and more-partisan public opinion towards the Jewish state, not a total collapse in support. 

When the war ends and new Israeli elections are held in 2026 (if not earlier) with the possibility of a new prime minister, it’s not hard to imagine public opinion for Israel rebounding before the next U.S. presidential election. Indeed, racing to follow the ideological herd instead of focusing on the big political picture is the very mindset that drove so many Democrats off the political cliff in 2020 — a lesson that is being quickly forgotten in party circles.

Jewish community activists in Minneapolis are voicing concerns about the rise of state Sen. Omar Fateh, a far-left lawmaker who, in a surprise upset, narrowly clinched the state Democratic Party endorsement on Saturday against incumbent Mayor Jacob Frey.

Fateh, a 35-year-old democratic socialist, has rarely commented on Israel or rising antisemitism during his time in the state Senate, even as he called for a ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas just 10 days after the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks.  

But his close alliances with anti-Israel voices such as the Twin Cities arm of the Democratic Socialists of America — which backs efforts to boycott and divest from Israel — have raised questions over his approach to key issues and his potential outreach to the organized Jewish community as he vies for the mayorship. 

In its mayoral endorsement questionnaire, the DSA asked candidates to pledge “to refrain from any and all affiliation with the Israeli government or Zionist lobby groups” — citing AIPAC, J Street and even the nonpartisan Jewish Community Relations Council.

Fateh’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment about whether he signed the pledge, but its existence is “alarming,” said Ethan Roberts, the deputy director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas.

“It’s instructive that Fateh sought and received the DSA endorsement,” Roberts told Jewish Insider in an interview on Monday. “There’s obviously a clear contrast between Mayor Frey, who’s a Democrat — and Sen. Fateh, who’s a DSA-er.”

Still, Roberts echoed other community activists in warning against drawing parallels between Fateh’s victory and Zohran Mamdani’s recent upset in New York City’s mayoral primary, noting that the party’s endorsement is not necessarily reflective of broader voter sentiment in Minneapolis — even as it comes with organizational muscle that could help to boost his insurgent campaign.

Fateh, a Muslim of Somali descent, celebrated his endorsement from the state party over the weekend as “a message that Minneapolis residents are done with broken promises, vetoes and politics as usual,” he wrote on social media. 

For his part, Frey, a Jewish Democrat seeking what would be his third and final term as mayor, is appealing the vote, alleging that several ballots had gone uncounted during the state party convention. His campaign filed a formal challenge with the state party on Monday.

“Everyone who endured this multi-hour convention process deserved to have their voices heard,” Sam Schulenberg, the mayor’s campaign manager, said in a statement on Monday, while pointing to what he dismissed as a “highly flawed process that clearly missed or did not count a large percentage of the votes cast.” 

Frey, the second Jewish mayor to represent Minneapolis, has been outspoken against rising antisemitism in recent years, and has butted heads with the City Council over anti-Israel resolutions he has dismissed as one-sided. 

If the endorsement of Fateh holds, it will “create a lot of headwinds” for Jewish party activists, Manny Houle, a pro-Israel party strategist in Minneapolis, told JI, anticipating a challenging relationship with Fateh and his allies on the left. 

“We always have an open hand, but if somebody bites it we don’t keep our hand extended — and we expect that to be the same here,” Houle said. “He’s surrounded by a lot of people who have made their positions clear.”

Houle also pointed to emerging concerns about a DSA-backed resolution that abruptly passed near the end of the convention on Saturday — opposing any city investment or contracts with what it called “entities complicit in the occupation and genocide in Gaza.”

Houle said he was working with some groups that are preparing challenges to the resolution, saying that it could cause “long-term issues” for the Jewish community — particularly in “how it is pigeonholed around the conflict” in the Middle East. “There’s no nuance in this conversation anymore,” he told JI. 

One Jewish party activist, who spoke on condition of anonymity to address a sensitive topic, said that the resolution was “emblematic” of his reservations  around Fateh’s bid. 

“I’m concerned about what this means for Jewish safety in Minneapolis,” he told JI. “I’m concerned about what his relationship will be with local Jewish organizations, if he’s elected.”

Yiscah Bracha, a Jewish activist involved in local Democratic politics, also expressed concerns about the trajectory of the race as Frey now finds himself playing defense. 

“I’m concerned by Fateh’s endorsement,” she said, “but I’m more concerned about the movement that produced the endorsement for him.”

By the time a group of activists attempted to erect an encampment at Washington University in St. Louis in late April 2024, Andrew D. Martin, the chancellor of the university, had already carefully considered how he would respond. It was a benefit, he said recently, of being “in the middle of the country,” far from the national media that ceaselessly covered the anti-Israel encampments at Columbia University and other high-profile campuses. 

Campus police arrested more than 100 people, the vast majority of whom had no ties to the university, and the encampment was shut down. Faculty, staff and student leaders all spoke out against university leadership for bringing in the police. But Martin saw it as an opportunity to enforce university rules and avoid the chaos playing out elsewhere. 

“We take a very strong pro-free speech approach,” Martin, a political scientist, told Jewish Insider in an interview last month. “But we also have restrictions which are based on time, place and manner. And for us, it was really clear, and we made it very clear to the campus community. Look, you can protest all you want. … But you can’t take over our buildings, you can’t deface our property and you also can’t set up an encampment.”  

Since then, Martin has teamed up with Daniel Diermeier, the chancellor of Vanderbilt University, in something of an informal pact — a joint effort to promote principled leadership in higher education, presenting their two schools as a refreshing counterweight to the dysfunction plaguing higher-ranked competitors like Harvard and Columbia. Both campuses largely steered clear of major antisemitic incidents in that intense spring semester in 2024. (The period has not been without criticism for Diermeier, either; he faced pushback from some faculty and students after canceling a vote on an anti-Israel boycott resolution.)

This February, Diermeier and Martin wrote a joint op-ed in The Chronicle of Higher Education calling on other universities to reject “creeping politicization.”

“The universities we oversee have drawn a line against politicization so that we can continue contributing to the nation’s competitiveness and strength abroad, and to stability and prosperity here at home. All American research universities should do the same,” Diermeier and Martin wrote. 

Published just days after President Donald Trump took office with the promise of scrutinizing elite liberal universities, the article was an attempt at setting out a marker, signaling to Trump and potential applicants that Vanderbilt and WashU haven’t lost focus like so many other universities who have found themselves in crisis mode since the Oct. 7 attacks in 2023. 

Both schools were committed to institutional neutrality — a position that has now been adopted by more than 100 American universities, including Harvard, Stanford, Columbia and Syracuse — well before Oct. 7 and its aftermath led other university administrators to conclude it is in their interests to not weigh in on complex political and social causes.  

“Whether it’s fossil fuel divestment or Ukraine or other things, we’re just not going to engage. Our faculty have strong views on those issues, as do our students. It’s their job to be advocates. It’s our job to create a playing field, if you will, for them to have those views,” said Martin. 

Diermeier said universities that had not adopted a stance of principled neutrality were susceptible to “competitive lobbying,” where students demand a response on one side or another.

“We saw this in gory detail after Oct. 7, where you had one group who wanted to say, ‘Well, you need to denounce Israel of genocide,’ and the other one said, ‘No, you have to support Israel,’” Diermeier told JI in June. “It ripped many university campuses apart. And we were very, very clear from the beginning that we are committed to institutional neutrality. We will not divest from companies that have ties to Israel. We will not denounce Israel’s ‘genocide.’ We will not boycott products that are associated with Israel in any way, shape or form.” 

It comes down to the role of a university — and whether it is up to university administrators to pick a side. Doing so, the chancellors argued, undermines trust in their institutions. (Others take a different position, like Ora Pescovitz, president of Oakland University, a small public university in Michigan: “A president’s voice is precious,” she told JI last year.)

“There’s a certain arrogance for us, that we think that if, like, Harvard speaks, that somehow an issue is settled,” said Diermeier, a political scientist and management scholar. “What is the purpose of the university? What we’re very clear on is that universities are about the creation and dissemination of knowledge through research and education and related activities. They are not in the business of becoming partisans in any type of political or ideological battle.” 

Many universities are still navigating the post-Oct. 7 maelstrom, trying to handle competing concerns from students, parents, alumni and faculty — all while facing civil rights investigations by the federal government. In March, Education Secretary Linda McMahon wrote a letter to 60 schools under investigation for antisemitic discrimination, including Harvard, Yale, Northwestern, Stanford and Princeton. 

“I think people that visit us see the difference, and they say this is a great place for Jewish families and for Jewish students to thrive, and we’re very proud of that,” said Diermeier. “We want to be a place where every member of our community can thrive. And right now, in the current environment, I think the contrast between what’s happening at other universities and what’s happening at Vanderbilt is visible for people.” 

Vanderbilt and WashU were not on the list. That presents an opening for them to reach Jewish students with concerns about what they’re seeing elsewhere, particularly as the Jewish student populations at many top universities have shrunk. According to Hillel International, just 7% of Harvard’s undergraduates are Jewish, compared to 14% at Vanderbilt and 22% at WashU. 

“The Jewish community at Washington University is very robust. Our students are comfortable and proud living out their Jewish identity on our campus, and have been able to do so for generations. And we’ll make sure that they’re able to do this over generations to come,” said Martin. WashU implemented a new transfer program soon after Oct. 7 to allow students to transfer for the spring semester, rather than waiting until the following fall. Several Jewish students took advantage of it after facing antisemitism on their old campuses. 

WashU’s appeal to Jewish students is not new; it has for years been tagged with the nickname “WashJew.” And more than two decades ago, Vanderbilt’s former chancellor said that targeting Jewish students was an explicit part of the university’s bid to better compete with Ivy League schools. Diermeier seeks to continue that push.

“I think people that visit us see the difference, and they say this is a great place for Jewish families and for Jewish students to thrive, and we’re very proud of that,” said Diermeier. “We want to be a place where every member of our community can thrive. And right now, in the current environment, I think the contrast between what’s happening at other universities and what’s happening at Vanderbilt is visible for people.” 

“It became clear to Daniel [Diermeier] and me that we’re never going to be able to have the sustained federal support or, for that matter, state support of our institutions, without broad support of the American people, and that the American people, in some respect, lost faith in us because of places where we have diverged from those important core principles,” said Martin. “That was amplified by the events of Oct. 7, or what happened after Oct. 7.”

Martin and Diermeier see themselves and their institutions as the stewards of a forward-looking case for higher education at a time when the institution is under attack, both from Washington and from Americans, whose trust in higher education has plummeted. Nearly 6 in 10 Americans said in 2015 that they have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in U.S. higher education, according to Gallup. In 2024, that number was 36%. Among Republicans, the number dropped from 56% to 20% in nine years. Among Democrats, the decrease was milder — but still present, moving from 68% to 56%.  

Oct. 7 only sharpened that distrust, Martin said. Regaining that confidence, he argued, is imperative to saving the institution of higher education — and staving off federal funding threats from Trump. 

“It became clear to Daniel [Diermeier] and me that we’re never going to be able to have the sustained federal support or, for that matter, state support of our institutions, without broad support of the American people, and that the American people, in some respect, lost faith in us because of places where we have diverged from those important core principles,” said Martin. “That was amplified by the events of Oct. 7, or what happened after Oct. 7.”

It’s not just about values. It’s a savvy political move. After all, both Vanderbilt and WashU would be in trouble if federal research dollars stopped flowing to the schools, or if Trump made the call that they could not admit international students, as is the case with Harvard. 

When asked about his approach to the Trump administration, Diermeier repeatedly declined to answer questions about the matter on the record. 

Martin acknowledged that he is concerned.

“I’m worried about everything coming out of Washington, whether that’s legislative action or actions of the administration, around endowment excise tax, federal research funding, the ability to have federal financial aid, the ability to admit international students. All of those things are up for grabs,” Martin said. 

But what WashU and Vanderbilt are willing to do is acknowledge that there are big problems in American academia. In other words, they’re saying that Trump’s got a point.

“Here are two institutions that are willing to stand in the public square and say, American higher education has lost its way in some respects,” said Martin. “We’re great institutions, and we’re committed to working to ensure that our institutions and higher education writ large will do better in the future.” 

A group of pro-Palestinian, anti-abortion activists disrupted an abortion rights rally outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, at which the leaders of multiple Jewish organizations were present.

The rally, organized by Planned Parenthood in anticipation of a ruling in the case Medina v. Planned Parenthood, included representation from the National Council of Jewish Women, Women of Reform Judaism and the Union for Reform Judaism. Rallygoers were forced to an alternative indoor location after counterprotesters became aggressive and disrupted the rally, attendees told Jewish Insider.

Video of the start of the counterprotest reviewed by JI, as well as accounts from NCJW’s chief of staff, Jake Green, and another witness who spoke to JI, shows two activists chanting “ceasefire in Gaza and the womb” on the side of the Planned Parenthood group.

“It was something I haven’t experienced before, which was really quite surprising to be there and see the like anti-abortion protesters show up, and specifically hear them chanting things like ‘Ceasefire in Gaza, ceasefire in the womb,’” Green said. “It was [strange] to see them in keffiyehs doing that.”

Green and the other witness said that the small group of activists repeatedly attempted to push their way into the Planned Parenthood group. At one point, a larger group of counterprotesters arrived simultaneously, bringing the size of that group up to around 20, and the counterprotesters aggressively pushed their way into the Planned Parenthood group of around 40, knocking at least one person over.

Rabbi Liz Hirsch, the CEO of Women of Reform Judaism, said that the counterprotest group had been getting progressively louder in its drumming and chanting, to the point that the Planned Parenthood group could not even hear its own speakers.

Police attempted to separate the two crowds, Green and the other witness said, and the Planned Parenthood group decamped to an alternative indoor location a few blocks away.

“[Thursday’s] rally at the Supreme Court should have been about standing up for health care access in the face of a devastating decision. Instead, we were surrounded by coordinated anti abortion protesters who were shouting, ‘cease fire in Gaza, cease fire in the womb,’” Sheila Katz, NCJW’s CEO told JI. “It escalated, and it was a moment that left me shaken, and some of us shaken, and I’m grateful for the swift response from law enforcement and Planned Parenthood’s strong security protocols. “

Green, who said he’s attended many such rallies at the Supreme Court, described the counterprotesters as particularly aggressive: “I’ve never seen it so agitational in this way, where they were really just violently trying to push their way into our protest and drown us out and be aggressive in that way. It was quite shocking.”

Hirsch emphasized that the counterprotesters’ aggressive behavior came in spite of the fact that the court had delivered the ruling they had been hoping for, allowing states to exclude Planned Parenthood from Medicaid funding.

“What happened today at the Supreme Court was unacceptable in terms of our physical safety,” Hirsch said. “No one should have to feel unsafe in order to stand up for their values.”

Green said that at least one of the counterprotestors was holding a megaphone emblazoned with the logo of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, a group active primarily in Washington, D.C. that couches its opposition to abortion in leftist principles. Photos from the group’s social media show activists affiliated with the group crowding around and pushing into the Planned Parenthood group outside the Supreme Court on Thursday.

“Planned Parenthood has got to go!” the group’s caption on social media reads.

When the Planned Parenthood group arrived at its backup location, a church near the Supreme Court, both Katz and Hirsch delivered remarks.

Katz said she discussed the fact that “it’s a scary time to be Jewish in America, and it’s a scary time to be a woman in America,” and discussed the fear that the Jewish community in the U.S. and particularly Washington is feeling following the killings of Israeli Embassy staffers Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky outside the Capital Jewish Museum.

“I knew Sarah and I shared about both of them and what just happened in the Jewish community, how scary and hard it was,” Katz said. “And I also shared with them how scary and hard it was to go back to the Capital Jewish Museum, which I did a week later. … I brought it up because I said, ‘It’s really important that we keep being proud of the identities that we have, even when people want to hurt us.’”

Hirsch said, “when we arrived at the church, as a rabbi and a faith leader, I felt really moved and inspired by the fact that we were able to find this sanctuary, this safe space in a house of worship.”

“While I shared a few of the remarks that I was going to make about our response, as Women of Reform Judaism, to this decision, I also wanted to make sure that we helped people feel safe again and re-center themselves. So I offered a prayer and we sang together,” Hirsch continued.

Planned Parenthood did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Israel on Monday bombed the gates of Iran’s notorious Evin Prison, where the regime holds and tortures dissidents, and conducted follow-up strikes near the Fordow nuclear facility a day after it was bombed by the U.S.

Evin has been a symbol of the regime’s oppression for decades. The Tehran prison is where the regime has incarcerated activists, protesters, journalists, dual nationals and others, and used torture methods including beatings, solitary confinement and sexual abuse. Iran expert Ben Sabti told Jewish Insider last week that Iranians have called on Israel to strike prisons so that dissident leaders held inside could escape and push for the toppling of the regime. 

The strike on the prison was one of several by Israeli fighter jets, targeting “bodies of government oppression in the heart of Tehran,” Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Monday morning. The military struck the headquarters of the Basij, the regime’s internal enforcement arm, which has been instrumental in enforcing Islamic law and suppressing protest; the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ internal security command center; the Alborz Corps, responsible for security and regime stability in the Tehran district; and a clock in the city’s Palestine Square counting down to Israel’s destruction by 2040.

“These command centers have significant military effect and additionally they impact the regime’s ability to impose control. Striking these military targets harms the Iranian regime’s military capabilities,” the IDF Spokesperson’s Office stated.

Israel also conducted follow-up strikes on the access routes to the Fordow nuclear facility on Monday, the IDF confirmed. The strikes came a day after the U.S. struck the complex, which is under a mountain, with bunker-buster bombs.

The full extent of the damage done to the site, as well as facilities in Natanz and Isfahan, remained unclear after the strike by U.S. bombers early Sunday morning.

President Donald Trump said on Sunday that the U.S. did “monumental” damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities – “Obliteration is an accurate term!” he wrote on his Truth Social site — amid reports that the sites had been severely damaged but not destroyed. 

Former Mossad chief Yossi Cohen told Israel’s Channel 12 News on Sunday that “to the best of my knowledge,” the U.S. strikes “succeeded in fully stopping the Iranian nuclear project, certainly at this point.” 

International Atomic Energy Agency Secretary-General Rafael Grossi said that the bombing likely caused “very significant damage” to Fordow but that “no one — including the IAEA — is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage.” 

An Israeli government source told JI that the full extent of the damage was still being assessed as of Monday morning, but that Natanz and most of Iran’s estimated 400 kg of highly enriched uranium held at Isfahan were destroyed, and little of the uranium was moved to other locations before the strike. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel was very close to reaching the main goal of its operation in Iran: rolling back the nuclear and ballistic missile threats to Israel.

“When we reach our goals in Iran, the war will end,” he said in a press conference on Sunday. “We will not be dragged into a war of attrition.”

An Israeli official told Ynet that “if Khamenei stops shooting and says he wants to end the event, we will accept it … We want to end the event soon, this week, but whether it happens depends on Khamenei. If he shoots nonstop, we will have to respond.” 

The IDF told JI on Monday that about 50% of Iran’s missile launchers have been destroyed.

Yossi Mansharov, an Iran expert at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, explained that it’s more important “to focus on the launchers that Iran retains, because without launchers, the missiles are useless.”

“This is a historic achievement for Israel, which will require Iran to check its defenses after the war,” Mansharov added. “The regime was caught unprepared for a war when it comes to defense and that has been very costly, as you can see from Israel’s extraordinary achievements.”

Still, Mansharov added, “Israel will also have to do an extensive examination to understand how it can improve its interceptions of deadly missiles.” (The writer is a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute.)

Iran hit an electrical facility in southern Israel with a ballistic missile on Monday morning. The Israel Electric Corporation said a “strategic infrastructure facility” was damaged near the city of Ashdod, causing power outages. 

The Islamic Republic launched some seven missiles on Monday morning, in four separate barrages, sending Israelis across the country into bomb shelters for over half an hour. Iran also shot one missile into Israel overnight, which was intercepted. No injuries were reported. 

As of Monday, Iran had shot about 500 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel since the start of Operation Rising Lion this month, according to the Israeli government. 

The IDF continued its strikes on Iran overnight and on Monday morning, including on missile launchers in Kermanshah and Tehran, fighter jets and six military airports in western, eastern and central Iran, and the Parchin military base, where experiments related to nuclear weapons have been conducted.

IDF Spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Effie Defrin said in a press briefing on Monday that the Israeli strikes are conducted “with an emphasis on the [Islamic] Revolutionary Guard Corps command centers and all elements of the threat to Israel … Every base from which we identify [missile] launches is attacked and damaged.”

Iranian media reported that the Islamic Republic shot down an Israeli drone.

Trump spoke out in favor of changing the regime in Iran, even as senior officials in Washington and Israel have said that is not one of the goals of the operation.

“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???MIGA!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

Netanyahu would not rule out killing Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei when asked about it last week, and Defense Minister Israel Katz said Khamenei should remember “the fate of the dictator of the neighboring country,” Saddam Hussein.

Iran continued to threaten revenge on the U.S. for its recent strikes. A spokesperson for the Iranian military’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters warned in a video in English that “Mr. Trump, the gambler, you may start this war, but we will be the ones to end it … The fighters of Islam will respond to the crime with powerful and targeted attacks that will lead to unexpected consequences.” 

A new coalition of pro-Israel LGBTQ activists is backing former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo as its first choice in a ranked slate of candidate endorsements for New York City mayor, according to a statement shared exclusively with Jewish Insider on Thursday.

“Amidst the unprecedented rise in antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment and activity within our city, we, LGBTQ Zionists of New York, feel a deep responsibility to share our endorsements for the Democratic primaries,” the group said in its announcement. “We believe it is essential to elect champions of both the gay community and of Zionists — those who support the Jewish people’s right to self-determination and the existence of the State of Israel.”

The group cited Cuomo’s “longstanding support for LGBTQ rights and plan to address antisemitism in the city,” which includes, among other things, a vow to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism into city law.

Cuomo, the Democratic front-runner who often touts his support for Israel and has called rising antisemitism “the most important issue” in the race, has been consolidating support from Jewish leaders in recent weeks, amid concerns over the increasing favorability of his top rival, Zohran Mamdani, a state assemblyman from Queens who has repeatedly refused to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state and described himself as an anti-Zionist.

In the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, many Jewish and pro-Israel activists have increasingly felt unwelcome expressing their Zionism in LGBTQ spaces — where the ongoing war in Gaza has fueled rising anti-Israel sentiment that has also shaped the June 24 mayoral primary in New York.

“New York City is home to the largest LGBTQ community in America and the largest Jewish population outside of Israel,” the group said. “The stakes of this election are beyond historic — they’re personal. As we enter Pride Month, we are grateful for our selected candidates’ work thus far. We stand with immense pride as New Yorkers, as LGBTQ Jews, and as Zionists, and we will advocate for a future where we are seen, heard and celebrated for all that we are — and nothing less.”

In addition to Cuomo, the coalition ranked Whitney Tilson, a former hedge fund executive who has been outspoken in his support for Israel and his criticism of rising antisemitism, as its second pick for mayor. Brad Lander, the Jewish city comptroller who has long identified as a “progressive Zionist,” is its third choice, followed by Zellnor Myrie, a state senator from Brooklyn, and Scott Stringer, a former comptroller who is also Jewish.

The coalition represents hundreds of LGBTQ activists in New York City from a broad range of organizations, a spokesperson told JI. The group, which says it plans to engage in get-out-the-vote efforts in the final leg of the race, is led by Roniel Tessler and Alex Kaufman, who were motivated to pursue grassroots LGBTQ Zionist organizing following the Oct. 7 attacks.

The group also endorsed several downballot candidates, including Mark Levine, the Jewish Manhattan borough president now running for comptroller; Jenifer Rajkumar, a Queens state assemblywoman hoping to unseat Jumaane Williams in the race for public advocate; and Patrick Timmins, who is mounting a campaign against the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg.

In a heated City Council race in Park Slope, the group threw its support behind Maya Kornberg, a Jewish political scientist now challenging Shahana Hanif, the incumbent, who has faced backlash from Jewish voters over her harsh criticism of Israel and alleged insensitivity to antisemitic incidents in her district.

“We are endorsing candidates who will confront, condemn and work to resolve the dangerous rise of antisemitism in our city, and ensure Jewish, LGBTQ and Zionist voices are protected and respected,” the group said in its statement on Thursday.

A group of journalists, activists and philanthropists have joined together to support the creation of investigative reporting projects in Israel. The new organization, called Shomrim: The Center for Media and Democracy, has published an open call for proposals for reporting and documentary projects that will be granted financial and professional support. Shomrim co-founder Ethan Bronner and CEO Alona Vinograd explained the organization’s vision to Jewish Insider.

Sorely missing: “I do believe that this kind of reporting is sorely missing in Israel, where media are in financial crisis as they are in much of the world,” Bronner told JI. He said the organization is modeling itself partly on the U.S.-based ProPublica — whose president, Richard Tofel, serves on its advisory committee — and on the Center for Investigative Reporting — whose former executive director, Robert Rosenthal, also sits on the committee. According to The Marker, the initiative intends to spend $3 million over a period of three years.

A-team: Shomrim was co-founded by Bronner, a senior editor at Bloomberg, along with philanthropists Laura and Gary Lauder; venture capitalist and social activist Oded Hermoni; Prof. Moshe Zviran; photojournalist Vardi Kahana; Calcalist publisher Yoel Esteron and editor and journalist Tamar Prizan-Litani. In addition to Tofel and Rosenthal, its advisory committee includes leading journalists in both Israel and the U.S.: Channel 12’s Ilana Dayan; Channel 13’s Raviv Drucker; Times of Israel editor-in-chief David Horovitz; Haaretz‘s Amos Harel; KAN 11’s Guy Zohar; Bokra’s Ghada Zoabi; New York Times columnist Bret Stephens; former NPR president Vivian Schiller, former CBS legal advisor Richard Altabef; E. W. Scripps vice president Ellen Weiss; and film producer Isaac Lee.

Untold tales: Vinograd, who previously led the Center for Democratic Values and Institutions at the Israel Democracy Institute, said Shomrim is looking to support projects “that put a light on important issues in Israeli democracy,” citing gender, the environment and healthcare, as well as the marginalized voices “of those less heard in Israeli media — Arabs, Haredim, immigrants [and] disadvantaged communities.” Bronner said he wants the organization to focus on societal challenges, “because these tend to be undercovered in Israel, where politics and national security take up most of the space of serious journalism.”

Free press: Bronner, a former Jerusalem bureau chief for The New York Times, Reuters and The Boston Globe, has also worked as a journalist in London, Madrid and Brussels. “Media freedom is pretty strong in Israel,” Bronner noted, “which is one reason we believe this project can work and make a difference.”

Wide net: While the current open call for projects has a deadline of March 31st, Vinograd said the center intends to accept proposals three to four times a year. “We will support a large number of projects,” she said, “not only of the written word. We hope to work also on audio (podcasts) or video (documentary) stories, and photojournalism as well.”