During Tuesday’s meeting between President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the leaders strengthened their relationship and confirmed the completion of several deals. Any plan to utilize such transactions as part of normalization with Israel, however, was notably absent. 

While taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office, Trump confirmed that the U.S. would sell Saudi Arabia F-35 fighter jets of similar caliber to Israel’s. At a dinner that evening, the president added that a strategic security agreement had crossed the finish line, while also formally naming Saudi Arabia a major non-NATO ally. On Wednesday, the two countries announced a strategic artificial intelligence partnership.

“The main takeaway of the visit was the normalization of the U.S.-Saudi relationship,” said Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former State Department negotiator. “[There was] very little, it seemed to me, not surprisingly, on the side of normalization to Israel. It’s almost as if Israel was sort of an afterthought this visit.”

When asked by reporters why normalization with Israel was not prioritized, Trump did not provide much of a response, instead asserting that Israel is “going to be happy.”

Observers had anticipated that Trump would roll out the red carpet for MBS on his visit to Washington. What remained unknown was whether the deepening ties between Washington and Riyadh would come with progress between Saudi Arabia and Israel, the United States’ closest ally in the region.

But the deals announced this week were made without any apparent requirement of progress toward normalization, leading some experts and leaders of pro-Israel groups to raise questions about the Trump administration’s strategy. 

“By the way this was done, President Trump seems to have elevated the partnerships with Saudi Arabia and maybe, to some degree, with other Gulf states, above pretty much all other U.S. partnerships, including Israel,” said Dan Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under former President Barack Obama. 

“So that means that other considerations, like ensuring the right incentives are still in place for Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel or ensuring that military sales are done in a way that protects U.S. interests and Israel’s security interests, may be less important than they have been under previous administrations.”

Shapiro said that while it is reasonable for the U.S. to strengthen its partnerships with Gulf countries, the deals gave away major incentives for normalization “without knowing whether it can be achieved later.” He also added that it came without guarantees from the Saudi government on limiting military cooperation with China and Russia. 

Anne Dreazen, the vice president for the American Jewish Committee’s Center for a New Middle East, told JI that Saudi-Israeli normalization could not have been achieved on this visit, adding that it was “not in the cards right now.”

“Now the paradigm is shifting where it’s about peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia being logical and good based on its own merits, when they can get the politics right and when they can reach agreement on the Palestinian issue,” said Anne Dreazen, the vice president for the American Jewish Committee’s Center for a New Middle East.

“Right now we’re not there. The politics in Israel and Saudi Arabia are not right for this,” said Dreazen. “I think President Trump realized that it wasn’t going to happen in this visit and wanted to move ahead with these deals because there’s a strong perception that making some deals with Saudi Arabia is in America’s interest.”

Dreazen, however, still believes normalization is “going to happen,” adding that she has confidence from conversations with Saudi officials that political differences will be resolved in the future. 

Trump’s decision to make significant deals with Saudi Arabia while not pressing for normalization suggests the White House is taking a different approach than in the past, Dreazen argued.

“Now the paradigm is shifting where it’s about peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia being logical and good based on its own merits, when they can get the politics right and when they can reach agreement on the Palestinian issue,” said Dreazen, a shift from how former President Joe Biden approached negotiations.

But with MBS leaving Washington with so many deliverables, it’s unclear whether he will still prioritize normalization. 

The Israelis are “going to be right to worry that the Saudis may feel like they’ve gotten everything they want and don’t have any need left for normalization,” Shapiro said. 

Following his Oval Office meeting with Trump, the Saudi crown prince told reporters, “We want to be part of the Abraham Accords, but we want also to be sure that [we] secure a clear path [toward a] two-state solution.”

Leaders of pro-Israel groups said normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia should remain a top policy priority for the U.S.

“The United States would be stronger and more secure if our major non-NATO allies worked together to promote regional peace, stability and prosperity,” said AIPAC spokesman Marshall Wittmann. “This objective would be advanced if Saudi Arabia joined the Abraham Accords, and U.S. leaders should urge it to do so.”

In a statement released on Wednesday, Democratic Majority for Israel’s president and CEO, Brian Romick, said that expanding the Abraham Accords must be “central to U.S. policy,” and urged Congress to play an active role in reviewing U.S. defense agreements with Saudi Arabia.

“Any substantial upgrade in the U.S.–Saudi relationship — including access to advanced U.S. defense systems — must be tied to meaningful, measurable progress toward Saudi-Israeli normalization,” Romick said in a statement. “It is now incumbent on the Trump Administration to use our leverage with Saudi Arabia to make real progress toward normalization.”

“There’s clearly a political dynamic going on here,” said Israel Policy Forum chief policy officer Michael Koplow. “Trump went out of his way to almost poke at the Israelis. He implied that [the U.S. is] OK with the Saudis getting F-35s but [the Israelis] want the Saudis to get a less advanced version, and he almost seemed to boast about the fact that he’s going to give the Saudis whatever he wants no matter what Israel says.”

Trump’s promise of F-35 sales to Saudi Arabia has raised questions about which model and allowances Riyadh will receive and whether Israel will maintain its qualitative military edge, which the U.S. is bound by law to uphold. To date, Israel is the only country in the Middle East to have obtained the fighter jet. 

U.S. officials and experts told Reuters that the F-35 jets the U.S. plans to sell to Saudi Arabia will lack superior features that Israel’s fleet has.

Israel Policy Forum chief policy officer Michael Koplow voiced concerns about the security aspect of the deals. 

“It doesn’t surprise me that all of these things are going ahead,” said Koplow. “What surprises me more is that some of the things that have been discussed over the past couple of days seem to put Israel in a more difficult security position, particularly this question of sales of F-35s.”

Israel’s government, meanwhile, has stayed largely quiet about the F-35 sales, though the Israeli Air Force has objected to the deal, warning that it could damage Israel’s air superiority in the region   

“There’s clearly a political dynamic going on here,” said Koplow. “Trump went out of his way to almost poke at the Israelis. He implied that [the U.S. is] OK with the Saudis getting F-35s but [the Israelis] want the Saudis to get a less advanced version, and he almost seemed to boast about the fact that he’s going to give the Saudis whatever he wants no matter what Israel says.”

During Jim Moran’s 24 years in Congress, the Virginia Democrat had a habit of putting his foot in his mouth, particularly when it came to his Jewish constituents. 

In 2003, he blamed the Jewish community for President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, prompting several local rabbis to call for his resignation. Four years later he blamed AIPAC for the war. The blowback was so strong that when then-Sen. Barack Obama accepted Moran’s endorsement of his presidential campaign in 2008, he stated plainly that he disagreed with Moran’s views of the Jewish community. 

Moran retired from Congress in 2015, but the 80-year-old still walks the halls of Capitol Hill. Now, he’s there as a lobbyist — primarily as a registered foreign agent lobbying on behalf of the government of Qatar. 

He is a regular in the offices of high-ranking members of Congress and senators. And last month, during a House Education Committee hearing about antisemitism in higher education, Moran was conspicuously seated directly behind Robert M. Groves, the president of Georgetown University, which has a campus in Doha and has received more than $1 billion from the Gulf monarchy. 

“Jim is one of these guys that people seem to like on both sides of the aisle. He’s been able to keep in contact with a lot of members when needed,” Tom Davis, a former Republican congressman from Virginia who Moran hired to help represent Qatar, told Jewish Insider. 

A Georgetown source said Moran was not working with the university or sitting in one of Georgetown’s three allotted seats at the hearing. Still, there’s no doubt he is a highly influential foreign policy voice in Washington on behalf of a country with which America has a complicated relationship.

Qatar is a major non-NATO ally of the U.S., an official designation conferred by President Joe Biden, and is home to the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East. But it also has financial and diplomatic ties with Hamas and other terror groups. Qatar’s leaders say that is necessary so the country can maintain its role as a trusted mediator, while its critics say Qatar’s close relationship with Hamas makes it unlikely to put real pressure on the terror group to make a deal with Israel or to release the hostages. Some on Capitol Hill and in the pro-Israel community have expressed concerns that Qatar’s massive investment in American universities has fueled anti-Israel activism and antisemitism on campuses.

With a Boston accent leftover from his childhood, Moran has a penchant for talking tough — and acting tough, too. In the 1990s, at the start of his time in Congress, he occasionally threatened to brawl with fellow lawmakers, and once shoved another member of Congress off the House floor. 

Moran was an early and consistent critic of Israel, long before the wave of anti-Israel sentiment that has exploded on the far left over the past two years. He has kept up ties with Jewish leaders in Northern Virginia, but those relationships grew strained as Moran repeatedly criticized pro-Israel advocates and Jewish activists. 

“Jim is an extraordinarily compassionate man. He has trouble with suffering. His judgment about what constitutes suffering and who’s causing it is not always accurate, and so that has gotten him in a considerable amount of trouble over the course of his long political career,” said Rabbi Jack Moline, who served for 27 years as the rabbi at Agudas Achim Congregation in Alexandria. Moline met regularly with Moran until the rabbi called for Moran’s resignation in 2003, after Moran blamed Jews for the Iraq war, a comment the former congressman later said he “deeply regret[s].”

“His relationship with the Jewish community fell apart,” Moline told JI. “It didn’t surprise anybody when, after he finally did retire from Congress, he was offered and accepted work lobbying for Qatar.” He first registered as a lobbyist for Qatar in 2017. His firm, Moran Global Strategies, has been paid more than $2 million by Qatar in the last two years, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets. A spokesperson for the Qatari Embassy did not respond to a request for comment, nor did Moran Global Strategies.

Though Moran expressed contrition for his antisemitic remarks during the lead-up to the Iraq war, his rhetoric toward the Jewish community has only grown more inflammatory in the decade since he left Congress. In recent years, he has appeared on several virtual panel discussions held by the Arab Organization for Human Rights in the U.K., a London-based NGO led by Mohammad Jamil Hersh, a former Hamas activist who has been sanctioned by Israel and was deported by the country more than three decades ago. In those conversations, he regularly blasted the influence of American Jews and the “pro-Israel lobby.”

During a February 2023 AOHR event, Moran tried to explain Washington’s support for “apartheid” in Gaza by pointing the finger at American Jews and suggesting that they are unduly involved in the American political system. 

“It’s about domestic politics and it always has been. The majority of people who contribute to the Democratic Party in America have Jewish surnames. Now think about that,” said Moran. He described them as people “whose principal reason for contributing to the political system in America has been the sine qua non of support for Israel, and unqualified support for Israel.” 

In this and several other interviews, Moran recognized that his language was rather impolitic.
“I don’t want to sound antisemitic, and Palestinians are a Semitic people,” Moran said. “I’m just saying that let’s deal with the political reality in the United States that’s driving and reinforcing the injustice that’s occurring within Palestine.”

Moran and his team have held dozens of meetings with members of Congress since the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks in 2023 that spurred the ongoing war in Gaza, mainly to talk about “Qatar’s role in the Middle East peace process,” according to documents he filed with the Justice Department as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act. At the same time, he has continued to question Jewish involvement in the American political system — including just days after Oct. 7, in a call hosted by the Muslim Public Affairs Council. 

“The reality is that campaign contributions have corrupted the United States Congress. One of the motivating factors is, ‘How do I please my political supporters, particularly my financial supporters?’ The reality is that the Jewish community, and frankly to their credit, is deeply engaged in the American political process,” Moran said in the MPAC call. “That’s one of the motivating factors that causes the Congress to look the other way where the Middle East is concerned.” 

Although he expressed skepticism about the supposed influence of American Jews in electoral politics, he encouraged Muslim, Palestinian and Arab Americans to increase their own influence. But his prognosis for their potential efficacy was grim. “I’m not sure they’re ever going to be able to successfully catch up,” Moran said. 

Even as Moran took aim at Jews’ participation in the political process, he routinely downplayed accusations of antisemitism that have been lobbed at him directly and at the broader anti-Israel movement. 

In September 2024, in another AOHR virtual briefing, Moran acknowledged that he would likely be called antisemitic for his comments accusing Israel of committing war crimes “daily” and for describing the situation in Gaza as “comparable to the Holocaust.” 

“Foreign aid going into committing war crimes on a daily basis because of the politics, because of the campaign financing, because of the control of the media — it’s inexcusable. It’s an indictment of what has become of this democracy,” said Moran, without saying who, exactly, he thinks controls the media. “It’s an indictment of the fact that our foreign policy has been Israeli-centric, and let me say one other thing so that people don’t particularly accuse me of being antisemitic, although I’m sure many will: Many of those protests across the country were led by Jewish students.”

This spring, after President Donald Trump returned to office and began targeting universities, Moran was dispatched to Capitol Hill to talk to Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee about Qatar’s funding of American higher education, which has come under the microscope.

It is notable that one of the people tasked with advocating for a country that is close to both America and Hamas seems to have a deeply rooted hostility to Israel and even to American Jews, particularly at a moment when Qatar’s dealings in the U.S. are facing greater scrutiny — such as when Trump said earlier this year that the U.S. would accept a Qatari gift of a luxury jet to use as Air Force One.

But Qatar has a suite of lobbyists who span the political spectrum. Moran primarily deals with Democrats. Qatar has in the past also targeted hundreds of conservative “influencers” to reach Trump’s inner circle, and employs several Republicans as lobbyists. Partisan politics is at play, too; Democratic lawmakers blasted the Air Force One move, while Republicans fell in line behind Trump.

Several prominent Trump administration officials have ties to Qatar, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, who said in her January Senate confirmation hearing that she remains “very proud” of the lobbying work she did for Qatar ahead of the 2022 World Cup. Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy and chief negotiator, has a history of business dealings with the country. 

“If you take a look at the folks they’ve got representing them, they’ve been all over the lot on that issue. It’s certainly not a pro-Arab versus Israel issue,” said Davis, the Virginia Republican who works with Moran on the Qatar file. “There’s nothing there to indicate that their lobbyists have any kind of ideological bent on that issue.”

Correction: This story has been corrected to reflect that Moran began lobbying for Qatar in 2017, not 2023. 

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), a vocal Democratic supporter of Israel in Congress, said in an interview with journalist Chuck Todd on Sunday that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had done “irreparable damage” to Israel’s relationship with and support among Democrats, tracing the origin of the breach to Netanyahu’s public clashes with President Barack Obama.

“If you’re a Democrat, and if you’re a Democrat of color and if you’re a Black Democrat, you take immense pride in Barack Obama. He represents one of the greatest achievements in politics. We take great pride in his presidency,” Torres said. “To see a foreign leader visibly disrespect him in the manner that Bibi Netanyahu did, I feel did irreparable damage to the relationship with the Democratic Party.”

Asked by Todd how he would advise the Israeli government to repair its relationship with the party, Torres offered no suggestions, repeating that “it feels like the damage may be irreparable.” He added that support for the U.S.-Israel relationship is “eroding, and anyone who denies it is ignoring the numbers.”

(Torres subsequently told Jewish Insider that the “irreparable damage” was referring to “​​the relationship between Netanyahu and the Democratic Party, not the relationship between Israel and the Democratic Party.”)

Torres also said that he has “no real relationship” with the Israeli government, despite his support for the Jewish state, and said that his conversations are usually general and high-level, and do not yield “useful information.” 

“I do not consider myself having a good relationship with the Israeli government,” Torres said.

He said Netanyahu should have been able to disagree with Obama, “but when you inject yourself into partisan politics and put your thumb on the scale in favor of one political party, that sets a dangerous precedent, and I believe that the consequences of geopolitical calculation continue to reverberate to this day.”

Netanyahu and Obama split publicly over the U.S.’s nuclear deal with Iran, and Netanyahu accepted an invitation from then-Speaker of the House John Boehner, a Republican, to address Congress to condemn the deal. 

He said that the U.S.-Israel relationship requires bipartisanship and that “if you politicize it, you’re not a friend of the relationship, you’re an enemy.”

Torres said Netanyahu had “made a terrible mistake” and that there is a “legitimate perception that the present Israeli government is just aligned with the Republican Party.”

The Democratic congressman also called for an end to the war in Gaza, the release of hostages, increased humanitarian aid to Palestinians, new Palestinian governance in Gaza and efforts to build on the Abraham Accords, arguing that warnings from Israeli reporters about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza must be heeded.

He’s one of several pro-Israel Democrats who have grown more critical of the Israeli government’s handling of the humanitarian situation in Gaza in recent days. Additionally, some congressional Republicans have warned that Israel’s conduct is risking American support.

Torres argued that the impact of the war for Israel has been mixed — even as it has severely degraded Iran and its proxies and “emerged from Oct. 7 stronger and … reestablished deterrence,” it has lost significant support in the United States.

The New York congressman has also recently raised eyebrows with his defenses of Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — though Torres has not endorsed Mamdani and said that Mamdani must address “real concerns” in the Jewish community.

Among the more surprising cheerleaders for President Donald Trump’s diplomacy with Iran were several progressive foreign policy analysts who had advised former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Kamala Harris. 

Now, many of those same voices — including Phil Gordon, Harris’ national security advisor who would likely have stayed in the role if she had been elected president last year — are expressing skepticism about Israel’s preemptive strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites, and urging Trump to pressure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cool it.

“I would have found it too risky to initiate military force with all that that could unleash,” Gordon told Jewish Insider on Friday. His approach would have been “to try to get an enduring, diplomatically-negotiated nuclear arrangement that prevented Iran from being able to get a nuclear weapon.” 

If he were advising Harris, or another Democratic president, Gordon would’ve wanted “to try to get that accomplished without having used this military action,” he said. 

Gordon also argued that Trump was manipulated into supporting Israel’s strikes by Netanyahu, even as Trump celebrated Israel’s killing of Iranian hardliners, noting that several of Trump’s senior advisors have urged restraint rather than intervention.

“His supporters did not put him in place to get involved in the conflict in the Middle East,” Gordon said. “A lot of his advisors … served in Iraq or are against U.S. military interventions in the Middle East. We know where Vance is in terms of intervention. The Tucker Carlson view, Don Jr. I think Trump really wanted to avoid military conflict and negotiate a deal and be the guy who got a better deal than Obama.” 

Ilan Goldenberg, who served as an Iran advisor at the Pentagon in the Obama administration and who advised Harris on Middle East issues during her 2024 campaign, told JI that Trump should try to encourage parties in the region to tone it down. 

“I think the appropriate position for the United States to be in now is the role of de-escalator,” said Goldenberg, now the senior vice president and chief policy officer at J Street. “The better option, the less risky option that had more good outcomes, was the diplomatic option. Unfortunately, it’s not the way it went. So now we have to see.” 

J Street released a statement on Friday calling for an end to the “cycle of retaliation and escalation,” and for a return to diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran. 

Both Gordon and Goldenberg questioned Israel’s end game in the strikes, which killed several senior Iranian military leaders and destroyed an above-ground uranium enrichment site at Natanz. 

“It definitely has set back the timetable for Iran’s nuclear capacity, but it hasn’t eliminated it, and we also don’t know what happens in terms of retaliation. We’d like to think and hope that Iran has been deterred and won’t respond in a way that we can’t handle,” Gordon said. “So far, so good, but we’re only on the first day, so there were real risks of doing it this way. And that’s why I would have sought, if at all possible, to do it a different way.” 

Goldenberg, who said the most important next step in stopping the violence is for the U.S. to help Israel defend against Iran’s retaliation, said he is unsure whether the Israeli success will turn into a long-term victory.

“The Israelis are incredibly good operationally, but they have challenges sometimes translating that into a strategic kind of sustainable victory, as opposed to just continuing to fight,” said Goldenberg. “What’s the end state here? What are you trying to do? Or is the objective to just be in constant conflict?”

Still, even as they said a return to diplomacy is the best way to move forward, both Gordon and Goldenberg acknowledged that Israel’s Friday attack on Iran had so far gone well for Israel.

“It is a remarkable display of Israeli military and intelligence capabilities,” said Gordon. 

“I think in the immediate [term], it had a lot of success. Very impressive operationally,” Goldenberg noted. 

Trump said in Truth Social posts on Friday that Iran could have a “second chance” at a deal, and that they should return to the negotiating table “before there is nothing left.” 

Goldenberg agrees — and he thinks Israel needs to hear from Trump that they can’t attack Iran forever.

“Make clear to the Iranians that there’s still a deal on the table. We’re willing to negotiate,” Goldenberg said. “And at the same time, make clear to the Israelis, there are limits to this. We can’t see this get out of control.”

Last Friday, a photographer captured President Joe Biden leaving a Nantucket, Mass., bookstore holding a copy of The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine, a controversial book by the Palestinian-American historian Rashid Khalidi, an anti-Israel academic who recently retired from Columbia University. 

The Black Friday purchase drew immediate ire from pro-Israel advocates certain that Biden was either trying to telegraph a political shift or to reflect his true beliefs — something akin to Khalidi’s perspective that Israel is a racist, apartheid state committing genocide in Gaza. 

But the image of Biden holding the book sparked fury among anti-Israel activists as well. In a post on the social media site X, Khalidi’s son, Ismail, weighed in: “Hey @JoeBiden, get my father’s book out of your blood soaked hands, you genocidal maniac.” 

Khalidi did not seem pleased, either. “My reaction is that this is four years too late,” he told The New York Post. 

What’s not clear is how the book found its way into the hands of Biden, who has often described himself as a Zionist. Nadia Bilbassy-Charters, Washington bureau chief of the Saudi-owned network Al Arabiya, described the book as “the most famous book narrating the Palestinian Nakkba,” referring to the Arabic word for “catastrophe,” which many Arabs use to describe the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 during which hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were displaced.

A Nantucket Bookworks employee who answered the phone on Monday declined to say if Biden picked up the book himself or if someone — a family member, an employee or someone else — suggested it to him. “We don’t comment on anything, we just respect his privacy and his coming into the store,” the employee said before hanging up. The book is now out of stock at the bookstore, according to another employee reached by phone.

With Biden in the store were First Lady Jill Biden; their daughter Ashley; and their son Hunter, his wife Melissa Cohen Biden and their son, Beau.

John Kirby, the White House national security spokesperson, said Biden’s purchase of the book reflects only an interest in reading and learning about history. 

“It doesn’t surprise me that he would go into a bookstore and get a book of history, particularly about the Middle East, to try to keep learning. He really does believe in speaking, learning and thinking broadly, and that’s what that tells me,” Kirby told reporters on Monday, noting that he had not spoken to Biden about the purchase. 

A White House spokesperson did not respond to multiple requests for comment about why Biden picked up the book. 

Displays of books about Palestinian history have become commonplace at bookstores, particularly those in liberal communities, after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks sparked the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. Described as a “history of settler colonialism and resistance from 1917 to 2017,” Khalidi’s book spent 39 weeks on the bestseller list after last Oct. 7, despite being first released in 2020. 

The incident marks something of a coda to the Obama-Biden era before it formally draws to a close on Jan. 20. The final days of the 2008 presidential campaign saw Barack Obama face scrutiny for his ties to Khalidi, with whom he had once been close when they both lived in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. 

A Los Angeles Times story that year spotlighted Obama’s friendship with Khalidi, reporting that at Khalidi’s 2003 goodbye party as he prepared to move to New York, Obama offered a toast: His dinners with the scholar had provided “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases,” Obama said, and he pledged to “continue that conversation, a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table … [but around] this entire world.”

On paper, Shaun Donovan seems to stand out as an eminently qualified candidate for New York City mayor. The 55-year-old housing and urban development expert with two master’s degrees is a policy wonk who held top jobs in the Obama White House and Bloomberg mayoral administration, and in conversation, he projects an air of academic forbearance reminiscent of his former bosses.

In his 200-page campaign policy book, released last month, Donovan lays out his painstakingly detailed and rather creatively rendered plan for New York City as it emerges from the ravages of the pandemic, calling for equity bonds of $1,000 for every child and envisioning a plan to engineer a series of “15-minute neighborhoods” in which “a great public school, fresh food, rapid transportation, a beautiful park and a chance to get ahead” are all within walking distance.

On Tuesday, Donovan announced a new initiative, “70 Plans in 70 Days,” in which he will lay out one new policy proposal every day until the Democratic primary on June 22 — a meticulous approach he is hoping will set his candidacy apart from the crowded field as a “campaign of ideas.”

“The plan for New York City is the best expression of that, and I really do have the boldest, most comprehensive ideas about the future of this city,” Donovan boasted in a recent interview with Jewish Insider. “But I also have the deepest experience in government to be able to ensure that those ideas can make a real difference in people’s lives.”

Donovan’s proposals have, appropriately enough, earned plaudits from serious policy experts in New York. 

“I’ve been impressed with Shaun Donovan’s focus on getting New Yorkers back to work,” said Eli Dvorkin, editorial and policy director for the Center for an Urban Future. “He has identified a number of strong models that New York City can build on — from apprenticeship programs to nonprofit tech training — and made it clear that he would invest heavily in skills-building infrastructure. That’s what the city will need to rebound from the current crisis and build a more equitable economy in the future.”

But it remains to be seen if Donovan has the wherewithal to pull off an upset. Several analysts who spoke with JI described the mayoral hopeful as a “talented” individual, while also observing that, despite his policy chops, voters don’t seem to be rallying behind him.

Shaun Donovan, secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, testifies at a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee hearing on Nov. 6, 2013. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

“Shaun Donovan is a tremendously talented public servant,” said David Greenfield, the CEO of the Met Council and a former city council member. “The challenge that he faces is that he’s always sort of been in the background and therefore doesn’t have the same political profile as some of the more active and better-known political candidates, many of whom have either held office or run for higher-profile office before.”

Polling suggests as much. Donovan seems to be lagging significantly behind the apparent frontrunners in the race, including Andrew Yang, the charismatic former presidential candidate; Eric Adams, the brash Brooklyn borough president; and Scott Stringer, the seasoned city comptroller.

But Donovan remains uncowed, citing another set of statistics that he claims supports his case. “I wouldn’t trade my place in this race with anyone,” he said. “I think it’s reflected in polling that New Yorkers want change and they want experience at this moment, and I really believe I’m the only candidate that represents both of those in the sense that nearly every other candidate is, in some way, part of the status quo.”

Donovan, of course, isn’t exactly a fresh face in New York City government, though it has been some time since he was on the scene enacting what experts characterized as meaningful change.

From 2004 to 2009, he served as former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s housing commissioner, creating the city’s first inclusionary housing program offering “density bonuses to developers who agree to set aside units as affordable,” according to Ingrid Ellen, a professor at New York University who specializes in housing.

“He left a legacy of improving the lives of so many people who don’t have the means to get habitable housing,” said Rabbi David Niederman, president and executive director of the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, who worked with Donovan on issues of affordable housing back in the aughts.

Following his tenure in city government, Donovan accepted an appointment from former President Barack Obama to helm the Department of Housing and Urban Development, during which time he helped lead a revitalization task force in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, among other things.

“I worked extremely closely with mayors across the country and saw, again and again, that particularly at a time when our national politics could be divisive and dysfunctional, mayors really touch people’s lives,” said Donovan, who went on to lead the Office of Management and Budget under Obama. “They are close to the ground. They are the leaders that can make the most difference in the day-to-day lives of New Yorkers and people in their communities.”

In conversation with JI, Donovan, who was raised on the Upper East Side, emphasized his family’s own personal connection to New York as an explanation for why he is now mounting a mayoral bid. 

His father, Michael Donovan, an advertising executive, had Jewish, Catholic and Protestant grandparents, and was “beaten up as a child because of that,” Donovan said. Michael, who was born in Panama and grew up in Costa Rica, “had a deep connection to his Irish roots, but also a sense of being an outsider,” Donovan added. “He came to the U.S. to go to school like so many immigrants, and then came to New York to find opportunity, and found it.”

“I would say my entire family owes everything to New York in a fundamental way,” Donovan elaborated. “But at the same time, I also grew up in New York in the 1970s and ’80s. I saw homelessness exploding on the streets. I saw the South Bronx and so many other communities around the city struggling, even burning to the ground, and that really lit a fire in me to go to work on behalf of this city that I love.”

Shaun Donovan

“My platform is really about repairing and rebuilding the city but also about reimagining it as a city that works for everyone,” said Donovan, who advocates for investments in bus rapid transit as well as keeping libraries open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, so New Yorkers will have increased access to broadband.

But getting elected and implementing such policies is in many ways a more challenging task than earning an appointment to public office, particularly in New York, where many prominent figures have tried and failed to do so, including Joe Lhota, Richard Ravitch and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. 

“This is a longstanding challenge,” said Mitchell Moss, a professor of urban policy and planning who directs the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University. “It’s not unusual that people who succeed in appointed life can’t make it in New York City politics.”

Donovan seems intent on proving that he will be an exception to the rule. In the first TV ad of the race, released in February, he painted himself as a veteran of the Obama administration with ties to the current president, Joe Biden — though such appeals appear largely to have gone unnoticed as other candidates gain traction. 

“Donovan’s going to have to do something creative over the next couple of months to be able to catch people’s attention and be, if not their number one choice, their second or third,” said Jake Dilemani, a managing director in Mercury’s New York office.

Donovan is now mounting an aggressive TV ad blitz as he seeks to earn name recognition in the new ranked-choice voting system, buoyed by $2 million in independent expenditures from his father. “I am following the law,” Donovan said of his father’s super PAC contributions in an interview with WNYC host Brian Lehrer on Tuesday. “There are dozens of these groups supporting many different candidates who are running, and I don’t coordinate with any of them.”

In the end, Donovan, who has staked out a position, for better or worse, as one of the brainiest candidates in the race, wants to focus on the ideas. “I think, especially in this moment of crisis, New Yorkers are really hungry for a mayor who has the boldest ideas about how we rebuild our health and our economy, how we make this a more equitable city.”

“Shaun Donovan is very smart, very capable and very knowledgeable about New York City,” Moss acknowledged. But in the highly competitive mayoral race, he said, “It’s not enough to be smart.”

Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy warned Israeli leaders not to ignore the objections to West Bank annexation plans raised by nearly 150 Democratic senators and members of Congress.

Flournoy, speaking during a panel discussion on the topic hosted by Israel Policy Forum, suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “playing with fire, not only in terms of fracturing the region and their relationships with Israel, but also fracturing American political support, which would be terrible and disastrous.” 

Flournoy — who served in the Obama administration from 2009-2012 —said she worries that if Israel moves ahead with annexation in the coming weeks, some Democratic lawmakers  may try to hold up the implementation of the 2016 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. and Israel and “decide to hold hostage our security assistance to Israel as a way of protesting Israel’s policies” in the West Bank.

“That may not be the most likely outcome, but it’s not unlikely either,” she suggested. Such attempts, Flournoy cautioned, would undermine long-standing bipartisan support “for critical pillars” of the security relationship with Israel. “That’s what really worries me,” she added.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro said on the webcast that “while there are voices in both parties that are sounding different notes, I still think there’s a large number of Republicans, as well as Democrats, who adhere to [the] principles that can help reestablish broad bipartisan consensus” on Israel and peace in the Middle East. “I am hopeful that is the case,” Shapiro added, “which gives us a lot to work with if there’s a new administration.”