This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

PERSIAN COVERAGE PUSH

Court ruling reviving VOA sparks cautious hope for expanded Iran coverage

The international broadcaster, along with Radio Free Europe, has struggled to deploy its Persian-language services to provide coverage amid an internet blackout in Iran

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

IVY LEAGUE INQUIRY

Report on declining Jewish enrollment at Harvard raises alarm and sparks debate

The report’s author argued Harvard has been ‘ambivalent’ about its decreasing Jewish population, while other Jewish leaders cast doubt on its findings

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

President Donald Trump declined to say on Monday if he knew whether Joe Kent, who stepped down last week as director of the National Counterterrorism Center in protest of the war in Iran, was leaking classified information amid reports he is under investigation by the FBI for doing so.

Trump made the comments while speaking to reporters from Palm Beach International Airport before boarding Air Force One, after being asked if he knew whether Kent was leaking classified materials. The president repeatedly derided Kent, a former Green Beret, for remarrying “quickly” after his first wife was killed in 2019 while serving in Syria and for his failed congressional campaigns.

“Now, I hear they’re looking at him for leaking. That’s possible,” Trump said, referencing Kent potentially being under FBI investigation. “But just so you understand, just to put it to rest, he lost twice badly. He also lost his wife. He’s remarried since. He lost his wife. I felt badly for him, so I told my people, ‘Reach out to him, give him a job at the White House.’ This is the thanks I get.”

“I take this guy, Joe Kent, who lost twice for Congress, pretty badly and tough, and he was devastated, and I know that he lost his wife,” he continued. “So instead of letting him live out his life, I brilliantly had my people call him and offer him a job in security, essentially, in the White House. And what does he do? He goes out and he says that Iran is not a threat, to get publicity.”

Trump explained that he is “not a fan” of Kent, criticizing him for what the president described as an ideological pivot on Iran policy. “He was all for everything. All of a sudden, he wasn’t,” Trump said. He also said he did not engage much with Kent and did not follow him on social media. 

“I didn’t deal with him for the most part. I saw him a couple of times, but I never dealt with him at all. I had no idea his ideology was left or right, whatever it is,” Trump said. “I can say this: He said very strongly that Iran is not a threat. Iran has been a threat for 47 years and there’s not a country in the world that doesn’t agree with me on that.”

Media reports began circulating last Wednesday that the FBI began investigating Kent weeks ago, prior to his departure from the Trump administration, for allegedly leaking classified information related to Israel and Iran. Following his resignation, administration officials quickly began describing Kent as “a known leaker” who had been kept out of the president’s orbit and excluded from briefings.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) did not directly address whether the degradation of Iran’s military infrastructure should be viewed as a positive outcome, instead emphasizing the war’s potential economic and geopolitical consequences. 

Over the course of the past week, U.S. officials have indicated that Iran’s military capabilities have been severely weakened. President Donald Trump has described Iran’s military as “decimated,” and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified at a congressional hearing this past week that the Iranian regime was “largely degraded.” 

When asked by MS NOW’s Joe Scarborough on Monday’s edition of “Morning Joe” whether that degradation was a “good thing,” Schumer called the question “premature.” 

“You can’t [answer that question] because it’s a premature question,” Schumer said. “What is going to happen in the next several months? Is it worth it? Will the world economy collapse?”

“I can ask that question,” Scarborough replied. “I’m simply asking on the military side: Is it good — regardless of whether we agree with going in or not — is it good that Iran’s military infrastructure has been seriously degraded?” 

Schumer again asserted that it could not be answered without understanding the full implications of the current conflict.

“In all due respect, if you ask the American people, if you have the choice of degrading the military structure in Iran, but having gasoline be $6 a gallon and our economy falling into a deep recession where millions lose their job, what do you think?”

Schumer ultimately signaled agreement with that underlying point, while maintaining his broader concerns. 

“The fact that the leader [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei is gone, no one regrets that. The fact that Iran has less ability to create military trouble [is a good thing], no one disputes that. But you have to look at the consequences.” 

Schumer argued that Congress would have had a clearer understanding of the potential economic and geopolitical consequences had lawmakers passed one of several war powers resolutions  — an effort that has been voted down by House and Senate Republicans with several Democrats joining them on several instances within the past month.  

“If Republicans had voted with us on the War Powers Act, all these questions would have been asked ahead of time instead of Donald Trump’s willy-nilly — one day yes, one day no,” Schumer said.

President Donald Trump revealed on Monday that White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and advisor Jared Kushner have been negotiating with Iran amid the ongoing war, which played a role in Trump’s decision to delay by five days potential strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure in response to Iran’s threat to fully close the Strait of Hormuz.

“We have had very, very strong talks. We’ll see where they lead. We have major points of agreement, I would say almost all points of agreement. Perhaps that hasn’t been conveyed. The communication, as you know, has been blown to pieces. They were unable to talk to each other,” Trump told reporters from Palm Beach International Airport before boarding Air Force One. 

“But we have had very strong talks,” Trump added. “Mr. Witkoff and Mr. Kushner had them. They went, I would say, perfectly. If they carry through with that, it’ll end that problem, that conflict, and I think it’ll end it very, very substantially.” 

“We’re going to get together today, by probably phone because it’s very hard to find a country, it’s very hard for them to get out. But we’ll at some point very soon meet. We’re doing a five-day period. We’ll see how that goes,” Trump continued. 

But the president kept the option of continued military action open: “If it goes well, we’re going to end up with settling this. Otherwise, we’ll just keep bombing our little hearts out,” he said.  

Trump’s comments came hours after he announced that he was delaying his planned attacks on Iranian energy targets by five days based on the parties’ “very good and productive conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East,” which he said will continue over the course of the week. The president announced the pivot about 12 hours before his 48-hour deadline to the Islamic Republic was set to expire.

Any future military action, Trump wrote, will be determined “subject to the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions.”

Axios reported on Monday morning that Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan had been “passing messages between the U.S. and Iran over the past two days in an effort to de-escalate” tensions and pause the fighting.

Officials from the three countries had separate conversations over the weekend with Witkoff and with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, the outlet reported, while sources said Witkoff and Kushner were negotiating directly with Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament.

Iran’s launch over the weekend of two ballistic missiles targeting the joint U.S.-U.K. Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean — hours after London said it would allow the U.S. to use the base to launch strikes on Iranian missile sites — deepened concerns that the Islamic Republic had not been forthcoming in the past about its weapons capabilities and set off alarms in Europe that the continent could find itself on the receiving end of Tehran’s long-range missiles.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said last month that the Islamic Republic only had ballistic missiles with the capacity to hit targets within a 2,000-km radius (approximately 1,200 miles), with the country’s state-run media quoting the diplomat as saying “We are not developing long-range missiles … we have limited the range below 2,000 kilometers.”

Diego Garcia is some 4,000 km from Iran, twice as far as the distance Iran’s top diplomat had claimed the country’s missiles could reach. It’s further from Tehran than most major European capitals — meaning that the bulk of the European continent is potentially within striking range of Iran. (And, critically, without the types of air defenses and civilian protective measures that have been deployed multiple times a day in Israel for the last month.)

The discrepancy didn’t go unnoticed by current and former U.S. officials. Brett McGurk, who served as a senior national security official in the Biden administration, noted Araghchi’s February claim alongside a map showing Diego Garcia’s distance from Iran, saying that Araghchi’s blatant falsehood “speaks for itself.” In a rare show of agreement between the Trump administration and its predecessor, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the White House’s rapid-response account shared McGurk’s post.

In a statement over the weekend, IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir warned that Iran had missiles “that can reach London, Paris or Berlin.”

A senior Iranian official denied to the fringe outlet Drop Site News that it was behind the attack.

Though neither missile reached the Chagos Island base — one fell short and one was intercepted — the weekend launches have elevated concerns that Tehran has developed the capacity to strike deep inside Europe — most of which is much closer to the Islamic Republic than the Diego Garcia base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

Senior British officials largely sidestepped specific concerns about the potential for Tehran to target U.K. soil. The country’s housing minister, Steve Reed, appeared to be the most senior British official to directly take on the implications for the U.K. of the attempted strikes on Diego Garcia, saying that there was “no specific assessment” indicating that Iran was planning to target the U.K. London has so far refrained from direct military engagement with Iran, but that neutrality could be tested if Tehran threatens U.K. interests.

The twin revelations that Iran has the capabilities to strike much further than initially believed, and that Tehran’s top diplomat — who has engaged in direct talks with the White House — has lied about those capabilities, are likely to deepen suspicion of the Islamic Republic among Trump administration officials and could prompt the EU and the U.K. to take a more aggressive posture toward the Islamic Republic.

As the U.S. deploys thousands of Marines to the Middle East and President Donald Trump continues to send mixed messages about whether he plans for a ground invasion of Iran, one GOP senator said he’s hoping the administration does not take that step.

“I would hope it wouldn’t come to that,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) told Jewish Insider on Friday, when asked about the possibility of a ground operation in Iran.

Hawley has previously argued that the war should wrap up quickly and said that deploying ground troops might require an affirmative congressional war authorization. His comments suggest that a ground invasion could cause further fractures among Republican lawmakers over the war.

Trump gave conflicting answers last week on whether he plans to send U.S. troops to Iran, saying at one point that he was “not afraid” to deploy troops, but saying later in the week that he did not plan to do so.

Already, a small number of other congressional Republicans are growing hesitant about the effort.

“I wish that the president would figure out a way to end the war. I think it’s becoming more challenging every day in terms of how you end it,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) said earlier this week.

Murkowski also said, before reports emerged of a potential $200 billion supplemental funding request for the war, that the funding level requested might “provide its own level of shock.”

And Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) said she would oppose any additional funding request for the conflict.

But other Republicans are standing firmly by the administration.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said that he’s not concerned about the possibility of placing troops on the ground.

“The president is doing what he needs to do, he’s got to protect American freedom, he’s got to destroy their nuclear weapons, their ability to hit us with ballistic missiles,” Scott said. “He’s doing the right thing.”

Republican voters expressed strong support for President Donald Trump’s military action against Iran, and would decidedly prefer a GOP congressional candidate who advocates for the war’s aims, according to a new survey from pollster J.L. Partners.

The poll, which surveyed 1,018 likely GOP voters between March 17-18, finds that an overwhelming share of Republicans (83%) support Trump’s war against Iran, with just 9% opposing. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of Republicans said they “strongly support” Trump’s war efforts.

Among self-identified MAGA-aligned Republicans, a whopping 92% of respondents support the war in Iran, with 76% strongly supporting it.

In addition, nearly three-quarters of Republicans (74%) said that the U.S. should continue its military campaign and finish destroying Iran’s military capabilities, as opposed to the 16% who preferred the U.S. stop its military campaign and not get involved in any wars in the Middle East.

The poll also found a sizable share of Republicans holds negative views towards far-right, antisemitic podcaster Tucker Carlson, even as many media outlets claim he speaks for the MAGA movement. Only 40% of Republicans hold a favorable view of Carlson, while nearly one-quarter of respondents view him unfavorably.

When GOP voters were asked whether they’d prefer a candidate endorsed by Trump or by Carlson and Megyn Kelly, a whopping 80% preferred a Trump-backed candidate, with just 7% siding with the podcasters.

Asked whether voters trust Trump’s position on Iran or Carlson and Kelly’s view, 83% sided with Trump while just 6% sided with the far-right podcasters.

In addition, when Republican respondents were asked their reaction if a GOP candidate were to share Carlson and Kelly’s positions on Israel and Iran, only 19% said they would be more likely to support such a candidate while 55% said they would be less likely to support such a candidate.

The survey also offers a reminder that podcasts remain a niche form of media among Republican audiences, with only 15% saying they “primarily” get their news from YouTube or podcasts. By contrast, nearly half get their news from Fox News or other cable news outlets, while 19% say their main source of information is from social media platforms like X.

The polling matches the election outcomes in Republican primaries this year. Already, former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), a rare anti-Israel voice in the party, resigned from office and is expected to be replaced by a stalwart supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Meanwhile, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), one of the few anti-Israel Republicans remaining in Congress, is facing the fight of his political career against Trump-endorsed challenger Ed Gallrein.

There also are very few GOP candidates running as critics of Israel or the Iran war, despite the outsized attention Carlson and Kelly receive in the national press.

Missile strikes from Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon resulted in over 100 casualties between Saturday night and Sunday morning.

One person was killed and another injured after two cars caught fire in the Upper Galilee from errant IDF shells that fell inside Israel, rather than Lebanon, an investigation by the military found on Monday.

MDA reported 15 wounded from missile fragments landing in numerous sites in Tel Aviv and central Israel on Sunday.

EMTs from the Magen David Adom emergency services, Taysir Subah and Safa Abu Rafea, said they “arrived at the scene and saw two vehicles on fire. During the firefighters’ extinguishing operations, we identified a man in the driver’s seat. We conducted medical assessments, he had no signs of life, and we had to pronounce him dead.”

On Saturday night, an Iranian missile struck the city of Dimona, about eight miles from Israel’s Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center. The direct hit caused extensive damage to several buildings in the city, injuring 31 people, including one who is in serious condition, according to MDA.

MDA EMTs Shai Binyamin and Gadot Vaknin said they were alerted by civilians on the street to elderly residents trapped in a safe room, whom they helped treat.

Three hours later, an Iranian missile struck Arad, a city near the Dead Sea. Emergency services in the area, which has seen fewer alerts than the rest of the country, evacuated 84 patients to Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba, including 10 in serious condition, among them children as young as four years old.

Yakir Talker, an MDA EMT, described “extensive destruction and chaos” at the scene. Another EMT, Riyad Abu Ajaj, said that “together with security forces, we conducted searches to locate additional patients. We provided medical treatment to many patients, including children.” 

At both scenes in southern Israel, the IDF Home Front Command led efforts to free people trapped in the rubble.

Schools in much of the Negev, which had been hit by fewer missiles than Israel’s center and north, were meant to reopen on Sunday. The IDF Home Front Command revised its guidelines to keep schools closed after Saturday night’s strikes. Schools have been closed since the start of the war with Iran late last month, and gatherings have been limited to 50 people near a shelter or safe room.

IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir met with the mayors of Metula and Kiryat Shmona, on the Lebanon border, saying that the IDF is “prepared for the enhancement of the forward defensive posture in the north.” In a later statement on Saturday, he added: “There is no more containment; there is initiative; there is preemptive action.” Last week, the IDF said it would increase ground operations in Lebanon.

“The more we strike and weaken Iran, the more we weaken Hezbollah,” Zamir added.

He also praised the “steadfastness and the resilience” of Israelis in the north, saying that they “enable us to continue striking and degrading the enemy.”

“We will not stop until the threat is pushed away from our border and long-term security is ensured for our residents,” he said.

This story was updated on March 23, 2026, to add the IDF investigation findings.

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), one of the few House Democrats who has supported strikes on Iran and opposed a war powers resolution to bring it to an end earlier this month, now says he wants to see the war wrapped up, and will vote for an upcoming resolution to end the conflict.

“It’s time to finish the operation in Iran. It’s time to be done,” Landsman said in a statement on Friday. “No expansion of the original operation. No ground troops.”

Landsman’s statement comes in advance of an anticipated vote on another war powers resolution to end the conflict next week, led by Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY). Landsman said he plans to vote for the war powers resolution, and urged colleagues to do the same. 

Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), Jared Golden (D-ME) and Juan Vargas (D-CA) were the only other Democrats to vote against the previous war powers resolution earlier this month.

“The fact is, in three weeks, we have destroyed nearly all of the regime’s missile and drone launch capacity and eliminated their ability, for now, to produce ballistic missiles and drones,” Landsman said. “This means the objective to destroy the weapons shield built to protect their underground nuclear enrichment facilities has been achieved.”

“The cost of inaction was far too high to tolerate. But now it’s time to be done,” he continued, adding that U.S. military officials have successfully executed their mission, so it is “now it is time for the administration to end the operation before we become entangled in a conflict with no strategic logic.”

The Ohio congressman criticized the Trump administration for its communication around the war, while praising military officials for how they have conducted the U.S. operations.

Cuellar, Golden and Vargas did not comment on how they plan to vote on the next war powers resolution. Assuming full attendance, just three other lawmakers who opposed the previous war powers resolution would need to flip to allow the next one to pass.

Landsman, Cuellar, Golden and three other moderate House Democrats are also co-sponsoring an alternative war powers resolution that would limit the duration of the war to 30 days from its inception, which also should be eligible for a vote in the House soon.

That 30-day deadline from the war’s beginning — March 30 — is quickly approaching, raising the likelihood that other Democrats like Cuellar and Golden might support ending the war, based on the timeline they laid out.

A federal judge’s ruling this week that voided the Trump administration’s efforts to shutter Voice of America, restoring more than 1,000 journalists and other employees by Monday, is raising some hopes that the embattled international broadcaster funded by the federal government may now be able to ramp up its Persian-language coverage to reach Iranians at a crucial moment amid war with the U.S. and Israel. 

While VOA had resumed some of its Persian news broadcasting in recent months, it has been hobbled by a yearlong near shutdown ordered by the Trump administration that had reduced the organization to a skeletal staff — further battered by the tumultuous tenure of Kari Lake, who until recently served as the de facto leader of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which oversees the network.

In a separate ruling earlier this month, the judge ordered that Lake’s appointment as acting chief had been unlawful and nullified her aggressive moves to gut VOA. President Donald Trump last week nominated Sarah Rogers, a senior State Department official, to take over USAGM — a position that requires Senate confirmation which Lake never received. The Department of Justice has not confirmed if it will seek to appeal the latest ruling.

One USAGM source expressed optimism that the judge’s decisions would result in “more resources,” but cautioned that “there are still leadership issues” in the Persian service — once one of VOA’s largest divisions — stifling its ability to report exhaustively on news developments and offer coverage without the appearance of bias.

The Persian division — whose content had seen a growing audience among Iranian news consumers before the shutdown, according to a VOA fact sheet — is now led by Ali Javanmardi, an Iranian Kurdish journalist who has drawn scrutiny for censoring the outlet’s reporting on Iranian opposition figures such as Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince who gained renewed prominence amid mass protests that swept the country prior to the war. One journalist with the Persian service said this month he was fired because of disagreements with leadership over the network’s direction.

The editorial constraints and massive cuts to VOA’s stable of full-time reporters not only “decimated the Iran division” but also “politicized it at a time when it is more important than ever for the United States to be speaking directly to the Iranians,” the USAGM source told Jewish Insider before the recent rulings, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue. “It’s a shame what has happened.”

Now, as the joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign in Iran continues amid a near-total internet blackout imposed by the country’s regime, the need to reach information-starved Iranians has only grown more urgent, several experts familiar with the matter told JI.

But there are ongoing concerns that VOA as well as a federally funded but independent network, Radio Free Europe/Free Liberty, which operates a Persian service called Radio Farda, will continue to struggle due to government roadblocks that have obstructed their ability to produce meaningful stories and even to transmit broadcasts that Iranians have viewed as trusted sources during previous domestic conflicts.

“By adhering to the truth, U.S. international broadcasting can be a powerful tool in America’s arsenal, particularly in Iran where RFE/RL and VOA have strong brands and audiences,” Jamie Fly, who led RFE/RL from 2019-2020 and now serves as chief executive of Freedom House, a think tank promoting global democracy, told JI on Thursday.

Under current management, however, USAGM “seems to be doing everything possible to ensure that President Trump’s messages to the Iranian people are not heard, and in some cases, directly contradicted,” Fly added.

RFE/RL, which Lake tried but failed to shut down, has faced a litany of obstacles that have particularly diminished Radio Farda’s broadcasting presence in Iran. In addition to withholding funding that forced its Persian service to furlough half of its staff, Lake’s efforts to target the network included cutting access to a key U.S. transmitter in Kuwait that allowed it to disseminate its broadcasts in Iran and inhibiting the use of virtual private networks that help circumvent internet shutdowns, among other hostile moves.

According to an RFE/RL source, USAGM “is still asking that” the network “use its own grant” resources to broadcast via short and medium wave radio from the Kuwait transmitter — which is federally funded. USAGM “resumed transmissions of Radio Farda” on shortwave in early February and medium wave in early March, the source told JI. The network has additionally paid for satellite as well as short and medium wave transmissions using its “own grant funds already through private vendors.”

“As the internet remains unstable” in Iran, the source said, “our journalists have been able to conduct interviews with and receive updates from Iranians on the ground only periodically.” 

Despite such issues, Farda “continues to garner a significant audience online,” the source told JI. From Feb. 28 to March 17, for instance, “Farda published 738 posts on Instagram, recording 105.5 million impressions and 28.6 million video views.”

Even as the organization has managed to bypass some impediments to its operations, another RFE/RL source described intense frustration with USAGM, calling its oversight “dysfunctional” as the agency has sought to exert its control over a network that — unlike VOA — is not a government entity.

“They have no plan,” the source said on condition of anonymity to avoid reprisals. “There’s no strategy.” 

USAGM “could and should be more cooperative when Iran blocks” internet access, the source told JI this week. “We should all be surging into Iran now,” where RFE/RL has learned that university students in the country have been “sharing shortwave radios to hear” its broadcasts amid the war.

USAGM did not respond to a request for comment. On social media, Lake has otherwise touted VOA’s efforts to reach Iranians, despite criticism that she has hampered its resources and diluted its Persian coverage — which she wrote in one recent post that she had tried to “realign” with “U.S. foreign policy.”

Experts raised doubts about the possibility of an imminent news surge into Iran even if the judge’s recent ruling is expected to soon restore VOA to its pre-shutdown capacity. As USAGM maintained an adversarial posture toward VOA, RFE/FL and other federally funded nonprofit groups, it still remains to be seen if Rogers, the nominee to succeed Lake, will change direction. Lake, meanwhile, has pledged she will appeal the ruling invalidating her role and said that she will continue at USAGM as its deputy CEO.

Amid the changes, Ilan Berman, an Iran expert at the American Foreign Policy Council who serves on the board of RFE/FL, told JI in an interview that he was “cautiously optimistic there is going to be more coherence to administration” inside USAGM, after a year in which he questioned its “strategic mission.”

During Lake’s tenure, “there was no coherence to the informational enterprise” except for a “focus on disruption,” Berman noted. “The people who suffer are the people of Iran.”

This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

DEADLINE LOOMING

Netanyahu has less than two weeks to pass a budget — or go to early elections

The prime minister’s governing coalition is struggling to stay intact to pass 2026 budget amid shifting political priorities

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

QUARREL ON THE QUAD

University of Michigan regent race revives campus fight over Israel

Anti-Israel activists are singling out regent Jordan Acker, hoping to unseat him with attorney Amir Makled, who represented a member of the school’s encampment

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

A group of congressional Democrats is urging the State Department to restart chartered evacuation flights and take additional steps to help U.S. citizens who wish to leave Israel amid the ongoing war with Iran.

The lawmakers described the State Department’s current partnership with El Al, which launched on March 13 with a limited number of special evacuation flights for U.S. citizens, as insufficient. The Israeli airline has currently suspended registration for the flights, and government-imposed security restrictions are limiting passenger capacity on each flight and reducing airport operations.

“We were shocked to learn this week that as the military conflict in Iran escalates and continues to threaten the safety of U.S. citizens in the Middle East, the State Department has abruptly and effectively ended emergency evacuations for Americans out of Israel,” the lawmakers said in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday. “As Israel continues to face threats from hostilities with Iran, the State Department cannot abandon American citizens abroad. Failing to assist Americans in their time of need is totally unacceptable.”

The letter, led by Rep. Laura Gillen (D-NY), was co-signed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Reps. Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Don Davis (D-NC), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Julie Johnson (D-TX), Greg Landsman (D-OH), George Latimer (D-NY), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Pat Ryan (D-NY), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), John Mannion (D-NY), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Joe Morelle (D-NY) and Johnny Olszewski (D-MD).

According to the letter, the State Department is urging Americans to rely on commercial transportation or the Israeli Ministry of Tourism, and El Al lacks the capacity to carry all U.S. citizens who wish to depart, leaving Americans “without real options.” The information provided by the State Department, the letter reads, is “causing frustration, anxiety, and fear.”

“In the midst of a conflict, U.S. citizens should not have to wait weeks to be able to board a commercial flight or cross the Israeli border into another country to find their way home. It is unacceptable for the State Department to leave them on their own,” the letter continues.

In a press release Thursday, the State Department heralded its partnership with El Al, which it said has “already allowed more than 2,000 American citizens to return to the United States from Israel.” 

The airline “will continue to reserve a percentage of seats on all regular U.S.-bound flights for Americans wishing to depart Israel” and has 28 flights scheduled over the next week “to the extent permitted by the Israeli authorities,” the State Department said. The release did not acknowledge that the registration form for the evacuation flights is currently closed.

Democrats have accused the administration of failing to adequately prepare to evacuate U.S. civilians, or government personnel, from the Middle East before launching the war in Iran.

The lawmakers called on the State Department to restart charter flights from Israel and elsewhere in the region; reopen the State Department’s crisis intake form, which helps citizens receive emergency information; activate a crisis task force to assist Americans attempting to leave Israel; and provide clearer information on commercial air travel options.

Thousands of Americans, currently in Israel, are unable to access flights home and are not being offered alternative travel options or any additional assistance by the State Department,” their letter reads. “Additionally, the Department’s inconsistent guidance and lack of responsiveness have added to uncertainty and fear, making the situation even more dire for impacted families.”

In its press release, the State Department defended its evacuation efforts: “After the launch of Operation Epic Fury, the Department offered charter flight options to thousands of Americans wishing to leave Israel to Athens and destinations in the United States, as well as ground transportation options to Egypt — with supply exceeding demand on nearly every chartered flight and bus.”

The war against Iran may have united the vast majority of Israelis who support its aims, but much of the governing coalition’s prewar political obstacles still have to be resolved by the end of the month — including the passing of a state budget for the current year and a Haredi conscription law — or else an early election will automatically be called.

The coalition failed to pass a 2026 budget by Dec. 31, a regular occurrence in Israel, due to several policy disputes. By law, if the Dec. 31 deadline is not met, it may be extended to the end of March. However, if the Knesset does not pass a budget by the end of March, the law states that the body will automatically dissolve, with an election held 90 days later.

The Knesset is slated to go into recess on March 24, but it appears increasingly likely that the legislature will stay in session, with efforts to finalize the budget continuing until hours before Passover, which begins on the evening of April 1.

If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition succeed in approving a budget, the official election date would be set for Oct. 26, though the parties could choose to hold it on an earlier date. 

Some Israeli media have reported that Netanyahu would prefer to hold the election before Rosh Hashanah (Sept. 12) and the subsequent three weeks of Jewish holidays; other analysts have said he would not want an election after Oct. 7, because the date will serve as a reminder of his government’s failure to prevent Hamas’ 2023 terror attack. 

If the coalition does not succeed in passing a budget, the election will be held at the end of June, and Netanyahu’s Likud party will have to launch a campaign, potentially as the war with Iran is still ongoing.

Before the war, the biggest political challenge for Netanyahu’s government related to issues surrounding Haredi military service.  

The Haredi exemption from the mandatory IDF draft was canceled by the High Court of Justice in 2023, just prior to the Hamas attacks — and shortly before Israelis became acutely aware of the IDF’s urgent manpower needs. Since then, the government has been embroiled in legal and legislative disputes over how many young Haredi men to conscript and what penalties should be imposed on those who refuse to serve.

With the issue unresolved, both Haredi parties quit their Cabinet posts last year, though Shas and parts of United Torah Judaism mostly continued voting with the coalition in the Knesset. Still, the parties demanded that a bill reducing penalties for not serving in the IDF be passed before they supported the budget.

While the head of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Netanyahu loyalist Boaz Bismuth, led the effort to draft legislation that the Haredi parties would agree to — the proposal would institute relatively low enlistment quotas and lessen and defer most penalties for refusing to serve — enough members of Knesset from other coalition parties opposed it that it was unclear that Bismuth’s bill would get enough votes to pass.

Last week, Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich announced that coalition parties agreed to put aside all controversial legislation, including the Haredi draft bill, as well as a reform led by Smotrich to further privatize the dairy sector, which faced significant opposition within Likud. The Haredi parties were reportedly incentivized to drop their insistence on passing the bill when Smotrich and Netanyahu agreed to meet their other budgetary demands.

Dropping the Haredi draft bill means that the status quo remains: The IDF is legally required to send draft notices to all Haredi men aged 18-26, though they do not have to send them all at once, and the government must stop funding yeshivas for young men who are required by law to draft. Yet the government does not plan to enforce the law while the war against Iran is ongoing, Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs told the High Court on Thursday.

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara flagged some Haredi budgetary demands as illegal, leading the parties to threaten once again to vote against the state budget unless the same amount of funding is diverted to places that Baharav-Miara would not reject. That dispute delayed a vote on increasing the wartime defense budget that had been set for Monday.

At the same time, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and his Otzma Yehudit party have yet to drop their most controversial proposal, the death penalty for terrorists, which they continue to demand be passed before the budget vote. Otzma has followed through on past threats to vote against the coalition or absent themselves from key votes if their demands are not met.

Ben-Gvir posted a video on X on Wednesday, in which an off-camera voice said, “I heard the Iranians say that you’re dead.” Standing in front of a gallows with a plaque with Israel’s anthem, a memorial to Jewish underground fighters who were hanged by the British Mandatory government, Ben-Gvir said: “I am dying to execute terrorists. Death penalty for terrorists.” 

Current and former Israeli and U.S. officials suggested that an Israeli strike on an Iranian gas field on Wednesday that prompted the Islamic Republic to strike Qatar was coordinated with the White House, despite President Donald Trump’s claim that the U.S. “knew nothing about this particular attack.” 

Trump made the remarks in a Truth Social post, in which he threatened that the U.S. would bomb the South Pars gas field, the Iranian portion of the larger field shared with Qatar, if Iran does not stop attacking Qatar. 

“The United States knew nothing about this particular attack, and the country of Qatar was in no way, shape or form involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this … and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar’s [liquid natural gas] facility,” the president wrote.

If “Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar,” he added, the U.S., “with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”

An Israeli official told Kan News, Israel’s public broadcaster, that the attack on the South Pars gas field was coordinated with the U.S.

Dan Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Pentagon official in the Biden administration, wrote on X, “Trump can post whatever he likes. But there is zero, I mean zero, chance the IDF would conduct a strike in that location without giving CENTCOM full visibility.”

“Trump knew (and approved),” Shapiro added. “Now he realizes it caused a major escalation with Iran’s (entirely unjustified) attacks on Gulf energy targets.” 

Shapiro later clarified that the Israeli strike “could not have been carried [out] without U.S. knowledge and explicit or implicit approval.” 

“It was predictable that strikes on Iranian energy facilities (by US or Israel) would lead to Iranian strikes on Gulf energy facilities,” he wrote. “There is a narrow window following the Israeli and Iranian strikes, and Trump’s Truth Social Post (untrue, but possibly useful in this context), to de-escalate away from further strikes on energy industry targets in either direction. That will still leave a very challenging situation to unwind, but [it] would be the best near-term development.”

Gilad Erdan, a former Israeli ambassador to Washington and a former member of Israel’s Security Cabinet, told Jewish Insider that it was highly likely the U.S. knew about the strike, saying that Trump did not criticize Israel in his post, and “in the same breath” as saying the U.S. was unaware, “[Trump] himself threatened to erase the [gas] field.”

Erdan noted that the South Pars gas field is “used for Iran’s domestic energy needs [and] doesn’t harm the international energy market.”

“Israel took upon itself to be at the front [of the situation] in my estimation because the field is also Qatari,” Erdan, who is also a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute for National Security, said. “Someone had to send the deterrent message about the energy field to the Iranians, that if they continue, then all options are open against them and they will be hurt badly.” (The writer is a senior fellow at the Misgav Institute and cohosts its podcast.)

Yaakov Katz, an Israeli military expert and author of While Israel Slept: How Hamas Surprised the Most Powerful Military in the Middle East, told JI that he agreed with Shapiro’s assessment. “There is no way Israel would attack such a strategic facility [without coordination] because they know it would draw the Iranians to attack the Gulf states,” he said. 

Katz pointed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s behavior since the war with Iran began late last month as further indication that Israel was unlikely to make such a move without coordinating with the U.S.: “Why would Netanyahu who behaved so carefully all throughout the war, coordinating with Trump to not upset him so he keeps the war going … do something that would anger Trump and potentially lead him to do something brash and declare the war is over?” 

“It was coordinated, and now Trump is saying what he’s saying to distance himself, but it was done to send a message to the Iranians,” Katz added.

Also Thursday, Saudi Arabia released a statement with the foreign ministers from Azerbaijan, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Pakistan, Turkey, Syria, Qatar, Kuwait, Lebanon and Egypt urging Iran to stop its attacks.

“The participants held Iran fully responsible for the losses and called on Iran to immediately and unconditionally cease its aggression and to comply with UN Security Council resolutions. The meeting also emphasized the dangers of supporting militias and destabilizing security, stressing that Iran must seriously reconsider its miscalculations,” the statement read.

If Iran continues, the foreign ministers stated, there will be “serious consequences for Iran and the security of the region, and will exact a heavy price, casting a shadow over its relations with the countries and peoples of the region, who will not stand idly by in the face of threats to their capabilities.”

Joe Kent, who resigned earlier this week from his role as director of the National Counterterrorism Center over his opposition to the war in Iran, offered a litany of baseless accusations about Israel while defending the Iranian regime in an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s program on Wednesday.

Kent doubled down in the interview on an allegation made in his resignation statement that Israel coerced the U.S. into the war for its own benefit. As evidence, Kent and Carlson — a friend of Kent’s and a leading critic of the Trump administration’s approach to Iran in the conservative movement — pointed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying earlier this month that the “imminent threat” that prompted the U.S. to take action was the foreknowledge that Israel was going to strike, likely resulting in retaliation against American targets by the Iranian regime. 

“So, the imminent threat that the secretary of state is describing is not from Iran,” Carlson mused. “It’s from Israel.”

“Exactly,” Kent replied. “And I think this speaks to the broader issue, who is in charge of our policy in the Middle East? Who’s in charge of when we decide to go to war or not?”

Kent argued that the Israelis “felt emboldened that no matter what they did, no matter what situation they put us in, they could go ahead and take this action and we just have to react.”

He suggested that the U.S. could have threatened to cut off Israel’s military aid, including defensive weapons, in order to prevent them from attacking Iran. 

“We could have said to the Israelis: ‘No, you will not and if you do, we will take something away from you,'” Kent told Carlson. “It’s fine that we offer defense to Israel but when we’re providing the means for their defense, we get to dictate the terms of when they go on the offensive.”

Kent also raised questions during the interview about possible foreign ties to the assassination of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk last fall. He told Carlson he tried to investigate Kirk’s killing, at a Turning Point USA event at a Utah college, last fall because of the pressure Kirk was facing over backsliding GOP support for Israel, but was blocked by the Justice Department and FBI. Kent said that the last time he saw Kirk was last summer at the White House, and claimed that the final message Kirk gave him was to “stop us from getting into a war with Iran.”

“One of President [Donald] Trump’s closest advisors was vocally advocating for us to not go to war with Iran and for us to rethink, at least, our relationship with the Israelis. And then he’s suddenly publicly assassinated and we’re not allowed to ask any questions about that?” Kent said. “The investigation that I was a part of [with] the National Counterterrorism Center, we were stopped from continuing to investigate. And the FBI will say that they stopped it because they wanted to have everything turned over to the Utah state authorities. Everything is going to trial, it’s very sensitive. But there was still a lot for us to look into that I can’t really get into. There were still linkages for us to investigate that we needed to run down.”

Kent said that while he was “not making any conclusions … Charlie was under a lot of pressure from a lot of pro-Israel donors. And again, we know, because of the text messages that have been made public, that Charlie was advocating to President Trump against this war with Iran.”

On Iran, Kent alleged that the regime and assassinated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were not interested in acquiring a nuclear weapon, while acknowledging that Iran’s strategy had been “to not completely abandon the nuclear program.”

He cited Khamenei’s 2003 fatwa on the production or use of nuclear weapons, arguing that there is “zero U.S. intelligence suggesting it’s been lifted or ignored in a way that changes the posture. Iran knows what happens when you openly pursue or acquire nukes or even give them up.”

Kent went on to claim, despite reports to the contrary, that Khamenei was working to keep the regime from becoming a nuclear power.

“I’m no fan of the former supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, however, he was moderating their nuclear program. He was preventing them from getting a nuclear weapon,” Kent said. “If you take him out, if you kill him aggressively, people are going to rally around that regime.”

The former Trump administration official later told Carlson that “a good deal of key decision-makers were not allowed to come and express their opinion” to Trump prior to the start of joint U.S. and Israeli military operations targeting Iran.

“In the lead-up to this last iteration, a good deal of key decision-makers were not allowed to come and express their opinion to the president,” Kent said, arguing that this was a contrast from the “robust debate” that took place ahead of Trump’s decision to strike Iranian nuclear sites last June. 

Kent said that efforts by the intelligence community to offer the president a “sanity check” during briefings “were largely stifled in this second iteration.” 

“They had that discussion behind closed doors, and there wasn’t a chance for any dissenting voices to come,” Kent said.

Asked about his resignation, Kent told Carlson that he spoke to Trump prior to announcing his decision publicly and said he believes they “departed personally on good terms.”

“I spoke with him before I departed the administration,” Kent said. “It went great. I mean, not the best conversation ever. I told him why I was leaving. He heard me out.”

Kent’s appearance on Carlson’s show came as sources told Semafor that the FBI began investigating Kent weeks ago for allegedly leaking classified information. 

The WH and FBI declined to comment when reached by Jewish Insider. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not respond to a request for comment on the matter.

This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

LONE STAR LIABILITY

Israel conspiracies threaten Democratic hopes in Texas runoff race

Bexar County sheriff’s deputy Johnny Garcia is facing off against Maureen Galindo, who has made antisemitic conspiracy theories a key feature in her campaign

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

HORSESHOE POLITICS

Onetime Democratic critics elevate Joe Kent’s conspiratorial resignation letter

Democrats previously slammed Kent as an untrustworthy extremist in opposing his nomination. Now, amid his anti-Israel accusations, some argue he has a point

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said that the U.S. and Israeli operations against Iran have largely destroyed Tehran’s “power projection capabilities” in the region, but that the regime remains standing, if weakened.

“The [intelligence community] assesses that Operation Epic Fury is advancing fundamental change in the region that began with Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and continued with the 12-day war last year, resulting in weakening Iran and its proxies,” Gabbard said at a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on worldwide threats on Wednesday. 

“The IC assesses the regime in Iran appears to be intact but largely degraded due to attacks on its leadership and military capabilities,” she continued. “Its conventional military power projection capabilities have largely been destroyed, leaving limited options. Iran’s strategic position has been significantly degraded.”

If the Iranian regime survives the current war, Gabbard said that it would “seek to begin a yearslong effort to rebuild its military, missiles and UAV forces.”

She further said that, if the regime remains standing, internal tensions and resistance to the regime inside Iran are likely to increase as the country’s economy continues to struggle under U.S. and international sanctions.

Gabbard said in her opening statement that Iran “was trying to recover from the severe damage to its nuclear infrastructure sustained during the 12-day war, and continued to refuse to comply with its nuclear obligations” to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Democratic senators pressed her throughout the hearing on apparent differences between those comments and her written remarks provided to the committee before the hearing, in which Gabbard said that Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was “obliterated” and that it had made “no efforts since then to try to rebuild” its enrichment capacity.

Under questioning, Gabbard affirmed that stance, but said Iran “maintained the intention to rebuild” its nuclear capabilities. She said she had omitted those remarks from her oral testimony for time reasons.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe throughout the hearing appeared to take a more aggressive and assertive stance on Iran than Gabbard, an isolationist and longtime opponent of war with Iran, offering a clear explanation and justification for the U.S. strikes. 

Ratcliffe said that Iran was continuing its nuclear and ballistic missile development, and that he disagreed with an assessment by former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent that Iran did not pose an imminent threat, which Kent alleged in his resignation letter.

“I think Iran has been a constant threat to the United States for an extended period of time, and posed an immediate threat at this time,” Ratcliffe said.

Ratcliffe said that the U.S. operation was “detailed” and “thoughtful” with specific goals to address a long-running and growing threat.

He said that Iran was continuing to build and develop missiles “at alarming rates” such that its offensive capabilities were on track to outpace and overwhelm the U.S.’ ability to build defensive weaponry.

At the same time, Ratcliffe said the U.S. strikes last summer were a “wild success” and that Iran was “unwillinging and incapable” of enriching uranium to 60% purity since those strikes.

Gabbard, meanwhile, repeatedly declined to say whether the intelligence community had assessed Iran to be an imminent threat to the United States, asserting that only the president has the ability to determine whether any threat is imminent, to the frustration of committee Democrats.

In her opening statement, Gabbard also said that Iran’s space launch capabilities would allow it to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile by 2035, if Iran decided to pursue that, though that assessment is pending updates after U.S. military operations.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chair of the Intelligence Committee, suggested in his question that the timeline was much shorter, and that Iran actually could have had an ICBM that could threaten the homeland in six months.

Ratcliffe did not explicitly confirm that timeline, but emphasized that Iran’s missile program was a present and growing threat, which “if left unimpeded … would have the ability to range missiles to the continental U.S.”

“It’s one of the reasons why degrading Iran’s missile production capabilities that is taking place right now in Operation Epic Fury is so important to our national security,” Ratcliffe continued.

Pressed repeatedly by Democrats on whether the intelligence community had warned the President Donald Trump of the likelihood — as previously assessed by intelligence officials — that Iran would attack Gulf states and close the Strait of Hormuz in the event of a war, Gabbard and Ratcliffe both emphasized that the administration was aware of and had taken steps to prepare for those threats, despite comments by Trump that such moves by Iran were unanticipated.

Gabbard also described “the spread of Islamist ideology, in some cases, led by individuals and organizations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood” as “a fundamental threat to freedom and the foundational principles that underpin Western civilization.”

She said that Islamists are using such ideologies to recruit and solicit financial support for terrorism globally, and that such activity has been increasing in Europe.

Gabbard called the Trump administration’s designation of certain Muslim Brotherhood branches as terrorist organizations, “a mechanism to secure Americans.”

Ratcliffe said the CIA is “very focused” on counterterrorism, including the Muslim Brotherhood, and that the administration has had significant success, which he could share further in a classified setting.

U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian production sites during the ongoing war have destroyed the Islamic Republic’s ballistic missile production capabilities, the IDF told Jewish Insider on Wednesday.

”Right now, they are unable, during this war, to produce ballistic missiles … due to steps we and the Americans took,” IDF Lt.-Col. Nadav Shoshani, the IDF’s international spokesperson, said in response to a query from JI. 

The elimination of production facilities and stores of material for manufacturing the missiles means that Iran has a finite number of ballistic missiles that they produce domestically. The Islamic Republic has been burning through its ballistic missile stockpile daily, shooting at Israel and others in the region.

Shoshani noted that ahead of the war, Iran engaged in the “hyper-production” of ballistic missiles, and suggested that the Islamic Republic could restart production after the war, as it did after last year’s 12-day June war.

”But right now, as they’re fighting and desperate, they are unable to produce more missiles,” he added.

The White House said in an X post on Saturday that “Iran’s ballistic missile capacity is functionally destroyed.” 

Jonathan Schanzer, executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JI that stopping Iran’s ballistic missile production “is a major achievement for both Israel and the United States. It’s a both a sign of tremendous intelligence collection and the ability to act on that intelligence.”

“The regime now has roughly 500 to 1,000 ballistic missiles,” Schanzer added. “Every time they fire one, their arsenal thins out. This is good news for Israelis who are tired of running to shelter.”

Overnight, an Iranian missile strike killed a husband and wife in their 70s in their home in Ramat Gan, a city adjacent to Tel Aviv. Israel’s Home Front Command confirmed that the missile carried cluster munitions; the strike also caused damage in the nearby city of Bnei Brak.

Naftali Halberstadt, an EMT with emergency service Magen David Adam, said that in Ramat Gan he “saw heavy smoke and destruction in a residential building. There was shattered glass and scattered items. During searches inside the apartment, two casualties were found unconscious, without a pulse and not breathing, with severe injuries … They showed no signs of life and we had to pronounce them dead.” 

An eyewitness told Kann, Israel’s public broadcaster, that there was a direct hit on the top floor of the building where the couple lived, and their balcony fell to the ground. A neighbor told ynet that the man used a walker.

On Wednesday morning, a 71-year-old man who lost consciousness on his way to a shelter in Rishon Lezion was taken to a hospital in critical condition. People at the scene attempted to resuscitate him with a defibrillator before MDA reached the site.

Since the start of hostilities last month, MDA has reported 263 casualties from missile fire, including 14 fatalities. In addition, nearly 800 people were injured while making their way to shelter. 

A day after announcing the elimination of the Iranian regime’s most senior security official, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani, and commander of the Basij paramilitary force Gholamreza Soleimani, the IDF continued to strike sites in Iran.

A day after announcing the elimination of the Iranian regime’s most senior security official, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani, and commander of the Basij paramilitary force Gholamreza Soleimani, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz announced that Israel killed Iranian Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib.

Khatib “was responsible for the Iranian regime’s internal system of murder and oppression and on advancing external threats,” Katz said. “Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and I authorized the IDF to eliminate any senior Iranian figure … without additional authorization. We will continue to eliminate and hunt down all of them.”

The IDF said it eliminated over 10 Basij posts in Tehran on Tuesday. The Basij had begun operations “from posts embedded within public areas in the heart of Tehran,” the IDF stated. One of the sites was previously used as a soccer club.

The IDF also continued its strikes and “forward defensive operations” by ground troops on Lebanon, the military spokesperson’s office said.

”The IDF will not allow any harm to the residents of Israel,” IDF Spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Effie Defrin said. “We are striking Hezbollah with determination at this very moment and will continue to target anyone who threatens our security.”

The Israeli Air Force struck dozens of Hezbollah infrastructure sites in three areas of Lebanon — Beirut, the Beqaa Valley and southern Lebanon — on Tuesday. Among the targets was an underground site used to store weapons, including cruise missiles and rockets, and Hezbollah’s stores of cash.

Israeli troops on the ground in southern Lebanon targeted 80 Hezbollah infrastructure sites, the IDF said Wednesday morning.

The IDF warned on Tuesday that Hezbollah was preparing to shoot a large barrage of rockets at Israel’s north, and later said that its efforts “reduced the scope of fire towards Israel.” While the Lebanese terrorist group did launch rockets into Israel, no casualties were reported. 

Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) on Tuesday urged the administration to work to free one of his constituents, Kamran Hekmati, from prison in Iran. Hekmati, who is Jewish and a U.S. citizen, has been held by the regime for nearly a year for visiting Israel for his son’s bar mitzvah more than a dozen years ago.

This week, the administration formally designated Hekmati as “wrongfully detained,” following an appeal from Suozzi and other lawmakers, a move the congressman praised.

“This is a positive step forward in what has been a very painful case,” Suozzi told Jewish Insider. “It’s really important that we keep on pushing that in any negotiations the administration has with Iran, that Mr. Hekmati be part of those negotiations.”

Suozzi said that being caught in the middle of the war “must be terrifying for him and for his family,” and that he’s concerned the Iranian regime may seek to use Hekmati as a “negotiating chip” in the ongoing conflict.

“We have to recognize that this is a very serious issue that he’s being punished for being an American and for being a Jewish American,” Suozzi said. “We just need more Americans to know that this is going on.”

He said that the administration’s designation of Hekmati as wrongfully detained is an “important step forward,” adding that he hoped it would deliver “a very clear message” that Hekmati’s freedom must be a U.S. priority.

On the conflict in Iran more broadly, Suozzi is walking a delicate line as one of the most moderate and hawkish Democrats in the House. He voted for a war powers resolution earlier this month that would have cut short U.S. operations in Iran. 

He said he has long felt that Iran is a bad actor and must be stopped. But he said that the briefing he received from the administration prior to the vote gave him pause.

“I was like, ‘OK, what’s the plan? What’s phase two?’ And then the whole thing with the Strait of Hormuz — it seems like it’s a pretty obvious issue,” Souzzi said, referring to the critical waterway that has been largely impassable and greatly impacted global oil shipping. “If you were thinking of this in any detail you would have known that this was going to be a major issue, and there’s a reason that we haven’t attacked for 47 years.”

“I’m emotionally very invested in the idea of stopping the bad guys in Iran, I want the administration to work with Congress to give us a plan,” Suozzi continued.

Despite his vote for the war powers resolution, Suozzi said that an immediate withdrawal would leave “everybody vulnerable and exposed.”

“We obviously can’t do that. … There has to be a plan, with the help of all the great minds that do exist, not only in the administration, but in the Congress and the larger community,” Suozzi said. “That’s why we have debate. That’s why we have democracy. That’s why we have the system we have.”

Suozzi is a sponsor of an alternative war powers resolution likely to come up for a vote this month that would set a 30-day time limit on the war, with the goal of providing sufficient time to responsibly and carefully wind down U.S. operations against Iran.

The Long Island congressman also said that “one of the most frustrating things” about the current U.S. effort is the lack of involvement from Gulf and European allies. arguing that the administration should have done outreach to those partners before attacking to bring them into the campaign.

Some Senate Republicans suggested on Tuesday that Israel’s killing of senior Iranian regime official Ali Larijani could help pave the way toward resistance and uprising by the Iranian people.

“They’re part of a terror state, and whatever they’re doing internally to go after their own people is something that none of us should simply stand by,” Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told Jewish Insider. “They’ve been a part of it for a long time. At some stage of the game, the people there will have had enough. We just want to make sure that this regime is weakened enough to where, when the people of Iran decide that they want a change in leadership, that it is a possibility of success for them.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who has been a vocal advocate for regime change in Iran, said that Larijani’s death will further weaken the Islamic Republic.

“The killing of notorious security chief, Ali Larijani, is the biggest blow to the regime since the death of the ayatollah,” Graham said on X. “Larijani was truly one of the key leaders of the regime’s security apparatus that is being used to terrorize the people of Iran and the region. His demise puts further pressure on the regime as they continue to lose their first and second layer of leadership. This was an amazing military operation by all those involved. Well done.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) described Larijani’s death as a necessary action to protect Americans.

“As much as you hate to see death, in this case, these are individuals trying to kill Americans. So unfortunately it’s what has to be done,” Scott told JI.

On the Democratic side, two pro-Israel Democrats said that while they’re critical of the Trump administration’s decision to enter the war without congressional authority, they’re not shedding tears for Larijani.

“Iran’s number one export is terror, whether it’s ISIS, Hamas, the Houthis — go ahead and name them all,” Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) told JI. “No one is sad because what they’ve done — not only to their own people but to people in the region and around the world — is unconscionable. So I’m not sad about that.”

“But,” she continued, “before we put any more Americans in harm’s way, it is the president’s constitutional duty to come to Congress.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said that Larijani “had a lot of blood on his hands, and he was a highly appropriate target for Israel,” though he criticized the U.S.’ decision-making in entering the war.

This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

DOMESTIC FRONT

As war wages in Iran, Justice Dept. reaches ceasefire with Tehran-backed network in Manhattan

Eighteen-year legal fight over the Iran-tied Alavi Foundation ends with a new group with similar leadership taking over its assets — and NYC skyscraper

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

NAMING NAMES

Jonathan Greenblatt calls out Chris Van Hollen, Ro Khanna at ADL’s national conference

The ADL’s annual summit comes amid high-profile antisemitic attacks during the Iran war

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, resigned from his role on Tuesday over opposition to the war in Iran, baselessly alleging that Israel had coerced the United States into what he characterized as a misguided military conflict.

In a letter to President Donald Trump shared on social media, Kent, a former Green Beret who had reported to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, wrote that he “cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran,” claiming that the Islamic Republic “posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.”

Kent, a hard-right former congressional candidate in Washington State who has pushed an isolationist foreign policy vision, has previously drawn scrutiny for promoting conspiracy theories, echoing pro-Russia messaging and associating with white supremacists and neo-Nazis, among other controversies.

During a failed House bid in 2022, Kent also said that accepting donations from pro-Israel lobbying groups like AIPAC puts Israel’s “interests ahead of ours” — invoking an antisemitic trope about foreign influence over American politics that is increasingly common on the far right.

Kent’s wife, Heather Kaiser, is a military veteran who has written for The Grayzone, an extremist outlet, authoring articles with its founder Max Blumenthal, a prominent conspiracy theorist who has published sympathetic coverage of Iran and spread misinformation about the Hamas terror attacks of Oct. 7, 2023.  

In his letter, Kent claimed that Trump had been tricked into striking Iran by “high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media” who “deployed a misinformation campaign that wholly undermined” the president’s “America First platform and sowed pro-war sentiments to encourage war with Iran.”

“This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to a swift victory,” Kent wrote to the president. “This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war that cost our nation the lives of thousands of our best men and women. We cannot make this mistake again.”

Kent, who served in Iraq, also claimed his first wife, Shannon Kent, a military cryptologist who died in an ISIS suicide bombing in Syria in 2019, had been killed “in a war manufactured by Israel.” Israel was not a member of the U.S.-led coalition combating ISIS at the time.

“I pray that you will reflect upon what we are doing in Iran, and who we are doing it for,” he concluded, telling the president that he can “reverse course and chart a new path for our nation” or “allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos.”

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, rejected Kent’s account. “As President Trump has clearly and explicitly stated, he had strong and compelling evidence that Iran was going to attack the United States first,” she wrote in a lengthy social media post.

She called Kent’s claim that Israel had duped Trump into joining the war “an absurd allegation” that “is both insulting and laughable,” arguing that “Trump has been remarkably consistent and has said for DECADES that Iran can NEVER possess a nuclear weapon.”

Speaking to reporters from the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump said it was a “good thing” that Kent had resigned, calling him “very weak on security.”  

“He said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat. Every country realized what a threat Iran was. The question is whether or not they wanted to do something about it,” Trump added. “So when somebody is working with us that says they didn’t think Iran was the threat, we don’t want those people.”

Kent’s comments, which underscored deepening divisions in Trump’s MAGA coalition over the war, also drew criticism from Republican lawmakers. 

Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE), a leading moderate voice in the House, accused Kent of fueling antisemitism. “Good riddance,” he said of Kent’s departure on social media. “Iran has murdered more than a thousand Americans. Their EFP land mines were the deadliest in Iraq. Anti-Semitism is an evil I detest, and we surely don’t want it in our government.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said Kent’s claims about Israeli influence were “clearly wrong” and that “there was clearly an imminent threat” to the United States.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) also criticized Kent’s letter and said they were glad to see him leave the administration — Lawler called him “a leaker who spent more time undermining our foreign policy than doing his job,” while Graham said, based on his claims, Kent “clearly … did not go to work enough.” 

On the other side of the aisle, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that Kent had been “right” to point out “there was no credible evidence of an imminent threat from Iran that would justify” an attack — even as he called Kent’s “record deeply troubling” and believed he “never should have been confirmed” to lead the counterterrorism office.

Meanwhile, Tucker Carlson, a close ally of Kent, praised his decision to resign. “Joe is the bravest man I know, and he can’t be dismissed as a nut,” Carlson told The New York Times on Tuesday.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Tuesday that Ali Larijani, the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, had been killed in overnight strikes in the Islamic Republic.

Also killed in the wave of strikes, according to the IDF, was Gholamreza Soleiman, the commander of the paramilitary Basij forces, who had led the elite unit for the past six years.

Larijani, a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander who rose through the regime’s ranks, was designated in January by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — who was killed on the first day of the war last month — to ensure the regime’s survival. 

Iran has not confirmed the claims.

As tensions intensified between the U.S. and Iran amid the regime’s violent repression of protesters in January, and as Tehran vowed itself “prepared for war,” a long-running battle with the Islamic Republic’s forces in Manhattan came to an end.

The final stages of the conflict between the Justice Department and the New York-based Alavi Foundation, which since 2008 has faced allegations of acting under Iranian direction, took place in secrecy — with scores of legal documents sealed and even vaulted away. 

But materials filed on Jan. 12 with the New York State Charities Bureau revealed its ultimate outcome: a settlement that will provide compensation for numerous American and Israeli victims of Tehran-backed terror, but also enable a successor organization to recoup control of the foundation’s vast assets, including its 36-story crown jewel skyscraper on Fifth Avenue.

The final deal — which a filing this month shows came together confidentially in the last days of the Biden administration, and has just begun to go into effect — will officially dismantle the Alavi Foundation and strip it of hundreds of millions of dollars. Formed as the Pahlavi Foundation in 1973 during its namesake shah’s reign, Alavi was later commandeered and rechristened by figures tied to the regime of the mullahs, and the federal government accused it of conspiring with an Iranian state-owned bank to evade taxes and sanctions.

The settlement of the suit brought by the federal government compels payouts totaling $318 million to the U.S. government and a wide array of people Iran and its proxies have harmed: in the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, in the 1996 Khobar Towers attack in Saudi Arabia, in multiple 1990s and 2000s suicide attacks against Israel, in the torture and murder of an Iranian dissident, and in the 1990 assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane. 

In exchange, a new non-governmental organization, the Amir Kabir Foundation, will rise in Alavi’s place. Named for a historic Persian imperial administrator, the new group will take full possession of 650 Fifth Ave., appraised at $435 million, plus bank and investment accounts holding more than $87.6 million, and properties from Queens to California worth tens of millions more and home to various Shia religious and educational facilities.

Records show that the Amir Kabir Foundation shares Alavi’s old address and even its phone number, and that three of the five members of the Alavi Foundation’s board of directors are part of the new group’s six-person leadership team. This includes Dr. Hamid Yazdi, who has served as Alavi’s president since 2013, and whose name appears on registration paperwork for the Amir Kabir Foundation. Yazdi did not respond to requests for comment. 

And although by-laws for the new group require it to remain “independent from any national or international agencies,” it will continue to provide funding and support for at least one longtime Alavi affiliate: the Qoba Foundation of Carmichael, Calif., which occupies an Alavi-owned property that the feds sought to seize in the early days of the case and which bears the name of a politically significant Iranian mosque.

The news that the Amir Kabir Foundation shared much of Alavi’s leadership team and would regain access to the huge rental revenues from 650 Fifth Avenue and the network of religious facilities lodged at the old organization’s properties alarmed longtime Iran-watchers.

“This is the Iranians playing anti-sanctions, anti-accountability three-card monte. They are treating the U.S. Department of Justice and the courts as if they are fools,” asserted Dr. Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute. “Iran’s only concern is maintaining the property. It’s lucrative and, in theory, can help undermine U.S. security from within. If the CIA owned a skyscraper in Tehran, would they be so willing to give it up, or would they just shuffle the acronyms around and hope no one notices?”

The news also worried Lara Burns, head of terrorism research at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism. Burns highlighted her own contributions to a report that found Alavi-backed groups had promoted anti-American, pro-ayatollah extremist rhetoric, and noted the group’s history of violating sanctions, as documented in the federal case. She suggested “government fatigue” with the lengthy and expensive litigation process may have contributed to the federal decision to settle.

A former FBI agent, Burns further argued financial penalties like those in the settlement can at times serve effective “punitive and deterrent functions” — but not in this case.

“I do not believe restitution and fines serve either purpose in the case of Alavi Foundation, who has shown a willingness to continue its behavior at all costs and the fiscal ability to maintain that agenda,” she argued to Jewish Insider. “Allowing Alavi to obfuscate their identity and basically start with a clean slate creates risks related to a continued foreign influence campaign on behalf of a regime that has called for the death of U.S. leaders and who has blatantly stated its intent to cause America harm through a variety of nefarious activities.”

But Alavi’s longtime attorney, Daniel Ruzumna, maintained that the new foundation would in no way serve as an alter ego to the old. He noted that the Alavi Foundation’s board had completely turned over during the yearslong legal fight, and stated that all members of the Amir Kabir Foundation’s leadership had submitted to interviews with the federal government and received no objection. 

Further, he pointed to language in the document filed in New York subjecting the Amir Kabir Foundation to a five-year term of oversight from the state Attorney General’s office, and said that it would operate under the “close supervision” of the Justice Department.

“AKF and its board members have no relationship to the Government of Iran, no connection to the Government of Iran, and have never been accused of having a relationship with Iran — zero, nothing,” Ruzumna said. “Any suggestion otherwise is categorically false.”

The office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, which handled the case, declined to comment for this story.

This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

BREAKING POINT

Antisemitism meets America’s ‘thoughts and prayers’ ritual

Democrats began calling out those who traffic in antisemitic rhetoric when they offered platitudes after an attack on a Michigan synagogue

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

UNDER PRESSURE

Ro Khanna facing new Democratic challenger hitting him from the political center

Tech entrepreneur Ethan Agarwal: ‘He thinks being racist against Jewish people is going to help him win the American left. I don’t care if he’s right. I just think it’s unethical and immoral’

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

The ongoing war in Iran is highlighting a widening gulf between center and center-left voters in Israel and Democrats in the United States. While Democrats in the United States are mostly opposed to the war, Israelis are overwhelmingly supportive of the effort.

Recent polling from Israel has shown that 92.5% of Jewish Israelis and 81% of Israelis overall support the war

The divide was particularly evident in an exchange on X this week between Yair Zivan, a centrist and top advisor to Israeli Opposition Leader Yair Lapid, and Matt Duss, a foreign policy advisor to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and a former confidante of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), whose post prompted the exchange. 

Sanders, on X, condemned the Israeli operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, saying, “The U.S. cannot continue to be complicit in [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s wars.”

Zivan said in response that he was writing from a bomb shelter and that Israel “is under attack by fanatical terrorists who want to murder us,” arguing that Sanders’ “humanity never seems to extend to Israeli lives.”

Duss responded that Israelis are under fire “because your fanatical prime minister and my president launched a reckless and unnecessary war. Bernie is trying to stop it. What’s your boss doing?”

Zivan, who also edited a book on centrism, responded that the blame for the attacks lies with the “fanatical regime in Iran” and “fanatical terrorist organization in Lebanon sworn to our destruction (yours too if they could get to you),” rather than with Netanyahu.

He followed up later saying that war “should be a last resort” but is “sometimes … just and necessary.”

Zivan told Jewish Insider that most Israelis agree about the need to take on Iran.

“For us Israelis, this war is just and necessary. The vast majority of Israelis (left, right and center) understand the absolute necessity of removing the Iranian threat which is hanging over us,” Zivan said. After Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, “no one should expect us to wait until it’s too late to defend ourselves from terror. I think most of our friends in the U.S., on both sides of the aisle, understand the importance of what’s happening for Israel’s national security.”

Ilan Goldenberg, the senior vice president of J Street, which has strongly opposed the war in Iran, acknowledged the divide between Israelis and the American left in an op-ed last week — but argued that Israelis are mistaken in their outlook on the war.

“Just because the Israeli public supports the war doesn’t mean it’s a good idea or in Israel’s interest. [Seventy-two] percent of Americans supported invading Iraq in 2003. That didn’t make it a wise decision,” Goldenberg said. “Americans and Israelis see this conflict through very different strategic lenses. … because American and Israeli interests and perspectives are not perfectly aligned.”

Israelis, Goldenberg continued, see Iran as their primary geopolitical enemy and as the primary threat to their homeland, which is not the case for Americans. He argued that “aggressive” Israeli views are also being driven by the “trauma” of the Oct. 7 attacks, and that the set of acceptable outcomes from the war are different for Israel than for the U.S., for strategic reasons.

Over two weeks into the war with Iran, American and Israeli leaders’ public statements about the effort and their goals remain largely in sync, with President Donald Trump praising Israel on Sunday for helping secure the Strait of Hormuz, while other countries with greater oil interests in the region have yet to offer to help.

However, the populations of the two countries have markedly different views of the war, which is popular in Israel while most Americans oppose it, which likely puts Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on different timelines. That, in turn, could impact the level of cooperation moving forward.

Assaf Orion, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, said that “it’s clear that even though this is a joint operation embarked on together, there are significant differences. In the end, it depends on Trump.”

Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, said that “it is our sense [in Israel] that Trump is on the same page about staying the course” with goals including “the complete neutering and elimination of the ballistic and nuclear programs as we’ve known them, but also to locate and get rid of the 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium,” as well as to “assist the regime to collapse and change.”

”Without regime change, this is all for naught,” Diker added. “[Israel] simply can’t live with this messianic, jihadist regime. This is our opportunity.” 

The U.S. and Israel are cooperating more closely than ever before, Diker noted. “It’s a real partnership,” he explained. “We haven’t had that since the founding of the State [of Israel]. It had been a client, an ally, the little brother, not a full-fledged partner. [Secretary of Defense Pete] Hegseth said the only amazing air forces in the world are the U.S. and Israel — that’s quite a statement.” 

“American and Israeli leaders are on the phone every single day — the president and prime minister, joint chiefs of staff, the defense ministers — it’s incredibly tightly coordinated, because we can’t afford surprises,” he added.

That close coordination has “a great deterrent effect … it scares the living daylights out of the Iranian regime. It encourages the [Iranian] people who are still at home in Iran” to rise up against the regime, Diker posited.

Orion noted that different goals between the U.S. and Israel may include the U.S.’ aim to destroy Iran’s navy, something Israel has not mentioned, and the types of missiles they are most concerned about. Israel seeks to destroy long-range missiles that can reach its shores, while U.S. forces in the Gulf are threatened by short-range missiles.

“Within those goals, there can be differences in the level of achievement, the understanding of how much is enough,” he said. “Iran is Israel’s number one priority. For the U.S., the number one priority is China. Iran is an existential threat to Israel, but is far from it for the U.S.”

“Israel is willing to take greater risks because of that threat assessment, while the U.S. has to explain why it’s taking this risk,” Orion added.

While one may think the U.S. could endure a longer war because of its larger size and economy, and because Israelis are the ones running for shelter multiple times a day, while Americans are not, Orion said that does not appear to be the case.

“In Israel, [leaders are] saying it will take as long as it takes, expressing a kind of patience, while the U.S. government speaks out against ‘forever wars.’ They can continue, but they are less forgiving of long wars than Israel at this time. … Though the Israeli population is under fire and U.S. troops are under fire, Israel is more willing to absorb losses because of the sense that it is being threatened,” he said.

Diker said the differences between the U.S. and Israel are mostly in their political timelines: “President Trump has midterms [in November] and Israel has national elections,” set for the end of October, but may be held earlier. “Both men understand the existential nature of the moment. … Both men know their legacies can be built on destroying the world’s most dangerous regime.”

Still, Diker said, “public opinion in Israel backs the prime minister on this war and public opinion in the U.S. is deeply divided on the war … and have over 50% of the public saying they don’t know what this war is about. … That gives Netanyahu more breathing room to finish what needs to be finished even if it takes more time. … [Israel] wants to make sure this regime is destroyed however long it takes.”

Trump, however, has to “withstand political pressure from home with regard to the more isolationist wing of the MAGA movement and the Republican Party as a whole. He has to tie things up in the coming few weeks,” Diker said. 

In addition, the “real challenge” in the U.S. is “the economic war, a soft spot in American political culture. People are nervous about the stock market, the price of oil and have become very impatient.”

Looking at how the war may continue, Orion said that while the public does not know what targets remain in Iran, the IDF has said there are enough targets left to require three additional weeks — or more — of warfare.

At the same time, Israel and the U.S. have to “manage their inventory of bombs and interceptors,” Orion said. “Israel also has the Lebanese arena. [Americans] talk about how whatever they use in the Middle East can’t be used in [East] Asia.”

Diker noted that the U.S. started striking Kharg Island over the weekend, which has the potential to cut off 90% of Iran’s oil revenue. After that, he posited, there will need to be some boots on the ground, likely from the U.S., to locate and destroy Iran’s enriched uranium. If that is achieved, he said, the American role in the war will likely end.

Israel, in the meantime, will “help topple this regime in Iran. What we’ve accomplished is severe unprecedented degradation of the regime’s capabilities.” In addition, Israel will likely continue fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Orion posited that it is unlikely that Israel would continue the war in Iran after the U.S. pulls out.

”The reason the U.S. would stop would be to open the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on oil interests. If Israel continues [bombing Iran], Iran will continue [to attack oil interests],” he said. “However, if the U.S. stops in Iran, Israel may continue in Lebanon with American approval.”

Diker said he thinks it is unlikely that the U.S. would “just pack up and go home.”

”They have to get this uranium out,” he said. “Trump has to be convinced that [Iran] cannot build a nuclear weapon, and he is not convinced of that yet. They still have the uranium and the regime is still operating, somehow.” 

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) has become one of the harshest critics of Israel in the House, in recent months associating with some of the leading anti-Israel figures within the Democratic Party — at one point proudly declaring his ties to a far-left antisemitic podcaster.

In his pushback to the U.S. war against Iran, he has caricatured those supportive of taking military action against the Islamic Republic as part the “Epstein class” — which critics have accused of being an antisemitic trope — while defending right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan from past charges of antisemitism. 

As a result, he is facing a primary challenge from tech entrepreneur Ethan Agarwal, who is accusing the congressman of embracing far-left views to seek national attention for a potential presidential campaign — at the expense of focusing on constituents back home in the Silicon Valley-based district.

“The district is being represented by a guy who could not care less about the people in the district, and that’s frustrating because I supported Ro when he first ran back in 2012,” Agarwal told Jewish Insider on Friday. “He’s completely [turned around] on basically everything that he said to his supporters.”

Agarwal said he sees Khanna’s activities, including his opposition to the Iran war and outspokenness against Israel, as plays for national attention, rather than representing the district that elected him.

Khanna “just totally does not give a s*** about the district. He’s running for president, and he wants to run to the left on every issue,” Agarwal alleged. “The district needs a representative that’s focused on the district itself, and that’s why I’m running for Congress.”

Those allegations of political opportunism were echoed in a recent Washington Post column by writer James Kirchick, who reported that Khanna professed to being a strong ally of Israel and the Jewish community earlier in his career when he was seeking a role in the Obama administration. The op-ed framed Khanna as a relentless self-promoter willing to change his views for attention and career advancement.

Khanna, in response to the allegations that he’s lost focus on his district back home, told JI he was “proud of my record representing California’s 17th district,” pointing to his work to secure $13.5 million in funding this year for projects including affordable housing, veteran housing, safe routes for children to get to school, clean water and transportation. He added that he has held nearly 80 town halls, is regularly meeting with local community leaders and is in touch with anti-ICE activists, and touted his constituent services and endorsements from local leaders and groups. 

“And I’m willing to take on powerful people when accountability is needed. When I called for the release of the Epstein files, many dismissed it and said no one in the district would care. They were wrong. Constituents raise it with me regularly because they want transparency and justice for survivors,” Khanna added.

Agarwal’s criticisms go beyond hitting Khanna for putting national issues ahead of local ones. He accused the congressman of engaging in shoot-from-the-hip social media commentary that has inflamed antisemitism at a time of heightened fears within the Jewish community. 

“Even if you weren’t running for Congress or trying to run for president — what is wrong with you?” Agarwal said. “If the congressperson of the district is advocating these kinds of things publicly, it stokes and it inflames the culture on the ground.”

“He thinks being racist against Jewish people is going to help him win the American left,” Agarwal added. “I don’t care if he’s right. I just think it’s unethical and immoral.”

Khanna responded that he has “consistently condemned antisemitism in all forms,” including speaking out specifically against various recent incidents, that he has been “been clear in my support for Israel as a Jewish and democratic state,” that he has worked with Jewish leaders and visited synagogues within the district. 

“This issue is personal for me. My nieces and nephews are Jewish through my brother’s marriage, which has deepened my understanding of why it is so important to speak out against antisemitism in any form,” Khanna continued.

Defending his affiliation with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner and far-left influencer Hasan Piker, Khanna said, “I do believe like Franklin Roosevelt and President Obama that we need to build a big tent, and Mayor Mamdani and Graham Platner are part of that. I also engage with media across the political spectrum, from Hasan Piker to Shawn Ryan to Theo Von to Sean Hannity, because we shouldn’t shy away from debates or discussions with people with different ideologies. We must engage.”

Agarwal has publicly linked Khanna’s rhetoric to an assault on two people speaking Hebrew in a San Jose restaurant earlier this week. The attack took place within Khanna’s district.

“It doesn’t take a genius to draw a line between those two things,” Agarwal said.

“We MUST capture and punish the perpetrators. Beyond that, we HAVE to turn down the dial of anti-Israeli rhetoric. [Khanna] acknowledge your role in this, and apologize for inflaming tensions,” he urged the congressman on X last week. “Take responsibility for creating the environment that enables these lunatics.”

In response, Khanna called the assault “horrific” and said it has “no place in our community,” adding that he had “unequivocally condemned” the attack and pushed for the attackers to be prosecuted.

“I’ve taken concrete steps to confront antisemitism locally. I’ve held multiple town halls and meetings with members of the Jewish community across the district to hear directly about their concerns and make sure they feel safe,” Khanna said.

He also highlighted his move two years ago to appoint a staffer in his office to serve as a point of contact for community members on antisemitism and a recent town hall he held with a local Jewish Democratic group. 

“My focus has been making sure that when antisemitism occurs, our community knows it will be taken seriously and addressed immediately,” Khanna continued.

While he didn’t weigh in on the broader strategic goals of the U.S. operation in Iran, Agarwal has argued that it’s an unequivocal good for the Iranian people and the world that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed on the first day of the joint U.S.-Israel operation, is dead, and criticized Khanna for trying to prevent or stop the U.S. operation against Iran.

“I am in support of the murder of Ali Khamenei because he was a brutal dictator and 20,000 Iranian Americans in [this] district — I spoke to many of them — agree with that,” Agarwal said. “I don’t know what happens from here. I think there’s open questions. I think there’s a good path, and there’s mistakes that can be made, but what I do know is that Iran is better off without him, and I think America is better off without him being alive.”

Khanna stood behind his advocacy for the war powers resolution, emphasizing the support it received among House Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and two moderate Jewish Democrats who initially opposed it. He said that the issue is a matter of constitutional authority. 

“I have been clear that the Iranian regime is brutal and destabilizing, as we have seen in its repression of its own people and the killing of thousands of protestors. But launching a war of choice in the Middle East without fully understanding the risks to our servicemembers or the potential for wider escalation has been reckless,” Khanna said. “People in my district understand the cost of these endless wars and oppose them. They expect their representative to stand up for the Constitution and to ensure that decisions are made carefully and with accountability.”

Agarwal has also blasted Khanna for his comments linking the Iran war to the Epstein case.

“What does [Jeffrey] Epstein have to do with the war in Iran? … aside from these being two topics he thinks are going to help him get elected president,” Agarwal said, adding that he believes that Khanna is using “Epstein class” as a broad pejorative to smear his political enemies, Israelis and the Jewish people.

Khanna told JI, “The ‘Epstein class’ refers to a group of wealthy and powerful elites who use their wealth and connections to operate as if they are above the law and not subject to the same accountability as everyone else. The phrase reflects the reality that Jeffrey Epstein and the people around him were able to operate for years without consequences,” and said “many prominent Jewish Americans” including Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) and columnist Bill Kristol “have used the phrase after I coined it.”

“Attempts to twist the meaning of that phrase into something else is an empty political attack to distract from the real issue, which is accountability for powerful people who believe the rules do not apply to them, including rules of war,” Khanna said.

Agarwal also didn’t expound at length on Israel policy — emphasizing that his first responsibility in Congress would be on local issues in his district. He did say, however, that he believes that Israel is “our strongest ally in the Middle East” and that a stronger relationship between the two countries is good for the U.S., the U.S. economy and the district.

With a nearly decade-long record in Congress, a prominent profile and $15.5 million in donations on hand as of the end of the year, Khanna is strongly favored to win re-election. In the previous election, Khanna picked up 63% of the vote in the all-party primary, rising to 68% in the general election against a Republican challenger.

But with some prominent figures in Silicon Valley’s tech scene getting behind Agarwal, he might have a chance at making Khanna work harder for his re-election.

Agarwal argues that Khanna is also taking the election for granted, and that his alleged lack of attention to local issues will backfire on him, as well as his support for a wealth tax and his breaks with the local Israeli, Jewish, Iranian and other immigrant communities.

“I’m going to win this election by listening to the people in the district and being their advocate, as opposed to focusing on my national profile,” he said, pointing to Khanna’s national travel to 2028 presidential primary states.

An Iranian missile struck northern Israel early Friday, injuring 58 residents and damaging 300 homes in Zarzir, a Bedouin town near Nazareth.

A woman in her 30s was moderately injured by shrapnel in her back, and the rest of the injuries were minor, according to Magen David Adom emergency services.

Zarzir Mayor Ataf Grifat described to Israeli media at the site “great destruction. … I heard the explosion from my house and I thought it was flying, even though I live hundreds of [yards] from the scene.” 

“One house was totally destroyed. About 300 homes were damaged from the blast that hit windows, doors and roofs. Whoever was in a safe room was saved, and those who were outside were injured,” Grifat added.

Many of the missiles Iran has lobbed at Israel had cluster munitions attached to them, which break into pieces when they explode, such that there are more impact sites. 

Soon after the attack, President Donald Trump issued a threat to Iran: “Watch what happens to these deranged scumbags today.” 

“They’ve been killing innocent people all over the world for 47 years, and now I, as the 47th president of the United States of America, am killing them. What a great honor it is to do so!” the president wrote on Truth Social.

Iranian state TV said that new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei released his first statement since being named to the position earlier this week, after his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in the initial strikes of the ongoing war with Iran, which began on Feb. 28. In the statement, Khamenei vowed that Iran “will not neglect avenging the blood of [the] martyrs.” 

The remarks were read by a TV presenter. Khamenei has yet to appear in public since ascending to the leadership, and was reportedly injured in airstrikes.

”The popular demand is to continue our effective defense and make the enemy regret,” the statement attributed to Khamenei said. “The lever of blocking the Strait of Hormuz must continue to be used.”

The Strait of Hormuz is the sole maritime artery through which oil can be exported from the Gulf to the open sea. While the U.S. has destroyed large Iranian vessels that could block the strait, smaller Iranian boats were laced with explosives and others are thought to have set mines in the area.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a press conference on Thursday that “the new tyrant, Mojtaba, the puppet of the Revolutionary Guards, cannot show his face in public.” 

Israel and the U.S. “have achieved enormous accomplishments that are changing the balance of power in the Middle East and beyond … establishing Israel’s status as a power that is stronger than ever,” Netanyahu stated. “We are crushing the nuclear infrastructure, the missile and launcher array, the headquarters of oppression, the regime’s power centers, and many more targets.” 

Netanyahu said that the timing of the war was important because Iran was taking “accelerated action to restore the nuclear and missile programs … If we had not acted immediately, within a few months Iran’s death industry would have been immune to any strike.” 

Netanyahu also called again for the Iranian people to rise up against their leaders: “The moment when you can embark on a new path of freedom … is approaching. We stand by you, we are helping you. But at the end of the day, it depends on you. It is in your hands.” 

The Israeli prime minister also hinted at budding relations with other countries in the Middle East, “alliances that until a few weeks ago would have seemed unimaginable,” he said.

The press conference was Netanyahu’s first since the war with Iran began, with reporters asking questions via video link, amid restrictions on gatherings due to the security situation. 

Since the beginning of Operation Lion’s Roar, Magen David Adom has treated 854 people with physical injuries resulting from missile fire, including 12 fatalities and 628 who were injured en route to shelter.

As the military conflict between the U.S., Israel and Iran continues, Turkish elites have reportedly begun circulating claims that Israel could turn its military attention toward Ankara should Iran emerge from the war depleted — a belief analysts say reflects growing mistrust and conspiratorial thinking in Turkey rather than any actual Israeli intent.

“I have started hearing from inside of Turkey suggesting that there’s a not unsizable position of governing elite circles which do believe that Israel will turn its attention next onto Turkey, militarily or some derivative thereof, after its finished with Iran,” Sinan Ciddi, director of the Turkey program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said during a livestreamed webinar on Thursday.

Steven Cook, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, called Turkey’s perception of Israel’s intentions as “ridiculous.” 

“I’m surprised that even the sophisticated are deep in this idea that the Israelis are going to take on Turkey next,” said Cook. “All I’m getting from Israeli professional security and diplomatic channels is that ‘we want to find a way to de-conflict with Turkey.’ The fact that the Turkish political elite and government think that this is what the Israelis are going to do is a fundamental misreading.”  

Cook suggested that Turkish officials and elites could be spreading those claims for “political purposes,” arguing that Ankara could be “whipping up anti-Zionist, antisemitic fury.”

“It is very easy for people in Turkey to make up all these conspiracy theories,” Henri Barkey, a senior adjunct fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said. He noted that while there is a “great deal of dislike” between Ankara and Jerusalem, there would be “positive aspects” should the two work together for the betterment of the region following the conflict with Iran.

“Turkey and Israel actually have a great deal of trade, over $5 billion a year, and it would make much more sense for Israel to work with Turkey and maybe invest in Iran together,” Barkey said. 

But, he said,  Jerusalem has instead become a “convenient enemy” for Ankara. “We have an Israel that clearly is much more capable than most people expected and is now willing to take on Iran, not once, but twice, so that is a very useful and convenient enemy [for Turkey].”

At the same time, experts said the two countries appear to have sharply different preferences regarding the outcome of the war with Iran.

“I think Turkey desires for the existence of a weakened Islamic Republic with the Islamic regime in charge,” Ciddi said. “But it really does not seek the emergence of a Democratic or ‘free Iran.’”

“Turkey could potentially continue to cooperate and work with a weakened Iran, because a weakened Iran would essentially be able to continue working with its proxy networks to destabilize what Turkey identifies its adversaries in the region, such as Israel, but it will also allow Turkey to grow into the region as this new hegemonic power,” he added.

Cook echoed those sentiments, calling a “greatly weakened Islamic Republic” the best outcome for Ankara. He said a diminished Iranian regime is more likely to “seek help” from Turkey. 

“A weakened Iran will be much more at the beck and call of Turkey on a variety of issues,” Barkey said. “Turkey will be able to exercise much more leverage and get what it wants from Iran.”

Meanwhile, Cook noted that Israel is seeking a much different outcome.

“If something emerges from this conflict that’s called the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is a strategic defeat for Israel,” Cook said. “The Israelis have spent a lot of time and effort trying to create a pathway for the Iranian people to overthrow this regime. It’s a defeat for Israel if that doesn’t happen, and that’s good for Turkey during their current adversarial relationship.”

However, Cook cautioned that such an outcome could also backfire on Turkish ambitions for a more stable region, cautioning to “be careful what you wish for.”

“We’re right that some kind of smaller Islamic Republic that’s IRGC-dominated is the best possible outcome for Turkey, but this is still a potent and dangerous, wounded state,” Cook said. “It’s not great for the region, because if you take the Turks at their word that they want regional stability, they’re not going to get it with some rump version of the Islamic State.”

Despite a recent escalation in Iranian missile attacks targeting Israel, experts remain confident that Tehran’s military capabilities have been significantly degraded by the U.S. and Israel. 

U.S. and Israeli officials have touted that Iran’s missile capabilities have been severely reduced, with CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper saying Wednesday that Iran’s ballistic missile attacks have “dropped drastically.” 

That may not feel like the reality for Israelis — after four consecutive days of declining missile fire, Iran briefly increased its launches to 46 missiles on Wednesday, a roughly 70 percent increase from the 27 missiles fired the previous day. That included a seemingly coordinated operation between Iran and Hezbollah, as well as a missile barrage directed toward the Old City of Jerusalem on Thursday that caused prayer at holy sites to be suspended. 

But the data shows and analysts remain confident that Iran’s stockpiles are being degraded. 

Ari Cicurel, the associate director of foreign policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, told Jewish Insider that the escalated attacks might actually be a “reflection of Iran’s degrading capabilities.” 

“[Iran is] launching more attacks throughout the day, but the overall size of the attacks, the number of missiles they’re launching, is substantially down from the first day of the war,” Cicurel said. “What I see them doing is trying to use all of their resources to fight a psychological war against Israel and to keep the Israelis under constant fire for as long as they can without as many missile launchers because the U.S. and Israel have degraded their launcher capabilities.”

Since the beginning of the war, Iran has launched 1,158 ballistic missiles and 28 cruise missiles across the region. As of March 12, at least 80 percent of Iran’s capacity to launch missiles at Israel has been eliminated, a mark officials expect could rise to 95 percent “within a week.”

“Instead [Iran is] firing more frequent attacks. They’re timing their attacks overnight, but fewer missiles per launch, because they have lost those capabilities,” he added.

Cicurel said it “tracks with the U.S. and Israeli claims that their launch capacity is substantially down,” adding that Wednesday night’s supposedly coordinated strikes on Israel from Iran and Hezbollah is also evidence of this, arguing it is a sign that “as Iran continues to lose its own capabilities, it is going to have to increasingly rely on proxies.” Experts stressed that Hezbollah’s arsenal is different from Iran’s and that the terrorist group “has its own supply.” 

“Iran loses capacity, Hezbollah is weakened, and so that’s why you see them joining the war,” Cicurel said. “Iran really has a few main proxies left. Hezbollah, despite Israel severely degrading it over the past few years, still remains a threat with rockets and missiles, but [Iran is] relying on Hezbollah to launch the mass amount of fire, and then Iran is sending a handful of missiles alongside that.”

Dan Shapiro, a deputy assistant secretary of defense under the Biden administration, U.S. ambassador to Israel under the Obama administration and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told JI that the latest wave of attacks from Iran and Hezbollah was “not unexpected.” He said the attacks, however, could suggest that Hezbollah “has been able to rebuild and recover, maybe more than had been understood,” adding that it is possible that Iran’s remaining capabilities could be slightly underestimated.

“It’s definitely possible,” Shapiro said. “I’m sure there has been success in eliminating and degrading significant portions of the Iranian missile attack capability, both in terms of missiles in storage and launchers, but I would be cautious about triumphal claims that the threat has been nearly eliminated, because it’s very likely Iran retains some capability and will continue to be able to use it if the war continues.”

Shapiro, however, agreed that Iran’s stockpile and launching of missiles has appeared to decline. He suggested Iran will likely conduct reduced attacks moving forward, referencing Israeli claims that 70 to 75 percent of Iranian launchers have been eliminated. “If that’s true, the degradation of the launcher inventory is important, and that reduces the ability of the Iranians to fire as many missiles as they did in the early days of the war.”

“I think the likelihood is that they [Iran] will continue to fire at lower levels than they did in the early days of the war, both because of reduced capacity and in order to preserve their remaining capability, but be able to sustain some attack presence on any given day,” Shapiro added. “That’s the most likely trend, if the war continues — sustained fire at reduced levels from the early days.”

Both experts expressed that, while it is unlikely that the U.S. and Israel will completely deplete Iran’s missile arsenal, Washington and Jerusalem could still maintain a successful operation should Tehran’s capabilities be severely degraded.

“They [the U.S. and Israel] may not fully remove all Iranian capabilities and capacity in this war, but the amount of degradation they’ve done to Iran and the lost capabilities could leave it in a bad enough position that the regime no longer has the capacity to launch a massive effort,” Cicurel said. “It also puts the regime in a place where internal dynamics take over and that leads to internal regime collapse. I think that’s the main effort.”

Cicurel also said that while the U.S. and Israel were initially focusing their attacks on military sites and missile launchers, both partners have “shifted” to going after Iran’s stockpiles of missiles and production capabilities.

“I think part of the objective is to severely degrade their [Iran’s] ability over the long term so you don’t see a situation like after the 12-day war, where Israel severely degraded Iran’s missile stockpile and then it was quickly rebuilt back to pre-war levels when this current war started.” 

Cicurel added that Iran has “very little capability to be rebuilding” its stockpiles during the ongoing conflict; however, he cautioned that Iran could be attempting to “seek Russian or Chinese support over the long term.”

“Ultimately, [the U.S. and Israel] have to contain the threat during the war and then reach a stable endpoint to the war … and then, when the fighting stops, you have to have a diplomatic strategy to put guardrails around any rebuild of the program,” Shapiro said. “I don’t think there is such a thing as removing the threat completely, but it has to be reduced and it has to be defeated.”

The Trump administration intervened to water down a broadly bipartisan sanctions bill targeting Iran’s oil exports to China, sources told Jewish Insider.

The House is set to vote next week on the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, led by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Sheila Cherfilus McCormick (D-FL), which has nearly 300 cosponsors and advanced out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in April 2025 by a voice vote, indicating broad bipartisan support. It began moving to the House floor earlier this year using a consensus measure for legislation with at least 290 cosponsors.

But the version of the bill now up for consideration is significantly different from the version that was first introduced and passed out of committee.

A congressional source and another person familiar with the legislation said that the changes, which they said would soften the impact of the bill, had been made at the behest of the Trump administration, which had delayed progress on the bill for months over concerns about placing sanctions on China, which would have been caught up in the expanded sanctions on Iran’s oil trade as the primary importer of Iranian oil. 

The administration has been engaging in trade talks with Beijing, which it felt could have been disrupted by the enactment of sanctions, though the Treasury Department has still sanctioned some oil processing facilities in China under other authorities passed by Congress in 2024.

As currently written, the legislation gives the administration the authority to impose sanctions on foreign individuals or businesses that have “knowingly engaged in any significant transaction related or incidental to the processing, refining, export, transfer or sale of oil, condensates, or other petroleum or petrochemical product in whole or part from Iran” or conducted significant transactions with individuals or institutions sanctioned under a previous Iran oil sanctions bill.

The sanctions would also apply to corporate officers of such companies and immediate family members who “demonstrably benefit” from these activities.

The original version of the sanctions legislation, however, mandated the imposition of such sanctions — providing less latitude to the administration in implementing the bill — and specified that banks and financial institutions, insurance providers, ship-flagging registries, pipeline builders and operators of processing facilities would all specifically be subject to sanctions under the legislation. 

It applied to successors and aliases of sanctioned companies, as well as to individuals or organizations that directly or indirectly owned or controlled a majority interest in a sanctioned institution or were majority owned or controlled by a sanctioned institution. And the sanctions applied to all immediate family members of those directly sanctioned.

The original bill applied to any transaction related to the Iranian petrochemical trade, rather than only “significant” transactions, and included specific mention of natural gas exports as well.

The updated legislation modifies the presidential waiver provision, which originally applied only if the president determined that waiving the sanctions was “vital to the national interests” of the U.S. The updated version allows a waiver if it is “in the national interests” of the country.

The original bill required the administration to notify Congress 15 days before it planned to renew a waiver, if applicable, whereas the new bill does not include any specific timeline for such notification.

The updated bill also entirely eliminates provisions creating an interagency working group responsible for working with international partners to coordinate sanctions and share intelligence.

The new version of the bill includes a provision that would terminate the sanctions if Iran ceases its malign activities.

The House will also vote next week on the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery (HEAR) Act, which aims to help Jewish families recover Nazi-looted artwork by eliminating loopholes used by museums and other stakeholders that have continued to hold such works.

The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

Both bills are being offered under suspension of the rules, a procedure requiring two-thirds support from the chamber. 

Both of Missouri’s Republican senators, Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, argued that the administration seems to have largely achieved its key objectives for the war in Iran — a posture that distinguishes him from most GOP colleagues and highlights subtle but emerging divisions among Republicans on the proper scope and duration of the war.

Pointing to comments by President Donald Trump saying that the war was substantially complete and that the U.S. had achieved its objectives, Hawley said on Fox News earlier this week, “I agree with what the president said last night. You look at all the success that we’ve had in the last 10 days. I mean, this thing is a victory. I think we should be hailing our military. We ought to be saying we’ve achieved our objectives here. … If this isn’t success, I don’t know what would be. … Now it’s time to declare victory.”

He also posited that Iran has nothing remaining with which to reconstitute its nuclear program — though the regime maintains a stockpile of enriched nuclear material which many experts argue cannot be fully secured without some form of on-the-ground presence.

Continuing a trend of making contradictory comments on the war’s timeline, Trump had said the same day that the U.S. could and would go much further in Iran, and that the U.S.’ aims could expand significantly.

Asked by Jewish Insider on Thursday about the metrics by which he was judging the success of the war, Hawley — who is one of the more prominent senators from the populist wing of the GOP — said he was referring to Trump’s own comments on the subject.

“I assume our overriding national security objective when it comes to Iran is to prevent them from getting nukes. And between our bombing last June and in the last … 12 days, I don’t know how they’re going to reconstitute their nuclear program anytime in, maybe, our lifetimes,” Hawley said.

“Our military has done an amazing job. I think it’s been an overwhelming display of force,” Hawley continued. “I know my Democrat colleagues, a bunch of them are saying, ‘This has accomplished nothing, nothing’s happened.’ It seems to me a lot has happened. And I think we should say that’s a good thing.”

Pressed on whether the war can be ended while Iran continues to fire missiles and drones at countries throughout the Middle East and is dropping mines in the Strait of Hormuz, Hawley said he would defer to Trump’s judgement on when to end the war.

“My point is just that I think the military has achieved a tremendous amount. It has ended [Iran’s] nuclear program for all intents and purposes. It has destroyed their navy. It has eliminated most of their ballistic missiles — those are good things,” he continued. “I’d be glad to take that [win].”

“Seems pretty good to me,” Hawley added.

Schmitt, who is also aligned with the populist wing of the party, likewise emphasized the progress the U.S. has made and pushed for a quick conclusion to the war.

“I know they’re way ahead of schedule. I’d look for a swift end to it,” Schmitt told JI. “I’m not interested in forever war in the Middle East, I don’t think the president is either. And I think that, again, they’ve laid out clear objectives and [are] making a lot of progress.”

Other Republicans are taking a distinctly different approach. Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) told reporters on Thursday that “victory isn’t determined by declaration, it’s determined by the outcome.” He argued that the U.S. can’t and shouldn’t end the war prematurely.

“If you pull 90% of the weeds of our garden and you leave 10%, you’re going to have a weedy garden,” Cramer continued. “The last 10% are the hardest, in many cases.”

The North Dakota senator, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed surprise that the U.S. had not been better prepared to secure the Strait of Hormuz, calling it a potential “miscalculation” and saying that the attacks on ships in the critical waterway “could have been avoided.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), one of the most vocal supporters of the Iran war on Capitol Hill, said that he thinks there are “weeks more of this coming.”

“I don’t see this conflict ending today. I think the mission is to make sure they cannot regenerate, that they’re going to be beyond capable of building missiles to hit us, and they’ll never go back to the nuclear business,” Graham continued.

Also on Thursday, in a rare Senate floor speech, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), emphasized that the war against Iran cannot be decoupled from the global axis, including Russia and China, with which Iran is aligned. 

Russia, McConnell emphasized, has reportedly been providing Iran with targeting intelligence. He criticized Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, who said earlier this week that he takes Russia at its word that it has not been doing that. 

“I’ve warned successive presidents to take the Russian-Iranian axis, actually, more seriously,” McConnell said. He emphasized the supportive role that Ukraine has taken in helping to protect the U.S.’ allies in the Gulf, and criticized administration officials for not moving more quickly in pre-war discussions to acquire Ukrainian anti-drone technology.

He also urged lawmakers who oppose the war to nonetheless support an expected request for supplemental military funding as “an overdue opportunity to invest in urgent and strategic defense priorities.”

This P.M. edition is reserved for our premium subscribers — offering a forward-focused read on what we’re tracking now and what’s coming next. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and feedback by replying to this email.

POLITICAL TIGHTROPE

Pro-Israel Democrats walking a fine line on U.S. operation in Iran

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said she would likely have voted to authorize force against Iran if the administration had approached Congress properly before launching the war

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

FEELING THE HEAT

UAE, more than Israel, absorbing bulk of Iranian strikes in war’s early weeks

Republican senators argued to JI that the war will ultimately be to the Gulf’s benefit, even if they’re feeling the pain now

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google