Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) has asked the State Department and intelligence community officials for a status update on the condition and whereabouts of Israeli American hostage Edan Alexander after Hamas claimed it had lost contact with his captors inside Gaza, the senator told Jewish Insider. 

Alexander, a Tenafly, N.J., native, is the only American hostage in Gaza believed to be alive. Hamas released a video of Alexander earlier this month in which the terror group said he had been held captive for 551 days, implying the video was filmed on April 9 or 10, 2025. 

One week later, a Hamas spokesperson alleged that the group had been unable to reach Alexander’s captors following an Israeli airstrike in the area where he was being held. The terror group has not provided an update on Alexander’s condition since. Hamas has lied about the status of hostages in the past and have also tried to attribute the deaths of hostages killed by their captors to Israeli bombing campaigns. 

Speaking to JI at the Capitol on Monday, both Kim and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said they were seeking more information on Alexander from U.S. and international channels. 

Booker declined to go into specifics, telling JI that there was “nothing I could share” given the fluidity of the situation. Kim, meanwhile, said that he was pressing the Trump administration for clarity about Alexander’s condition and was working on setting up meetings with the Egyptian and Qatari ambassadors in hopes that they could provide an update. 

“We’ve asked the State Department and intel community to try to provide us any and all information that they might have. I talked to his parents about this and we’re just trying to figure out what’s what. Also, we just met with the hostage office at the State Department to try to press on the necessity for us to have a sense of what’s true or not on that front. I’m trying to see if I can meet with the ambassadors of Egypt and Qatar as well to see if they have any information through their own routes in terms of engagement,” Kim told JI. 

The two senators have been in frequent touch with Alexander’s parents, especially in recent months as U.S. negotiators and the senators themselves pushed to include Alexander in the group of hostages that was released before a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas fell apart in March. The Tenafly native, who turned 21 while in captivity in December, was on IDF patrol at Kibbutz Nirim on Oct. 7 when he was kidnapped into Gaza by Hamas terrorists. 

Israel will not accept a Hamas-proposed five-year ceasefire and hostage-release deal, because it does not require the terrorist organization to disarm, a senior Israeli official said in a briefing to journalists on Monday.

A Hamas official said on Saturday the group would release at one time all of the remaining hostages in Gaza — 59 total, including at least 21 living — in exchange for a five-year ceasefire.

Hamas would not, however, agree to disarming and would only enter an agreement to end the current war in Gaza, rejecting a 45-day ceasefire and hostage deal proposal proffered by Israel earlier this month.

The Israeli official said that the five-year proposal has been “going around some Arab states.” 

“There is no chance we will agree to a ceasefire with Hamas that will only allow it to rearm, recover and continue its war against Israel,” he said. 

Regarding a recent report that Qatar encouraged Hamas to harden its stance in the negotiations, the official said that “the Qataris had a negative influence in the current negotiations.” 

The official said that the reason Israel has been fighting at a lower intensity in Gaza since the last ceasefire ended on March 18 was to give hostage negotiations a chance.

”We want to exhaust the effort to return the hostages and that influences our patterns of action,” he said.

However, the official added, “our patience is not endless,” indicating that the war could increase in its intensity in the coming weeks.

With regard to President Donald Trump’s proposal for Gazans to emigrate, the official said that there are Western countries, including Canada, that told Israel they want to help their citizens or relatives of citizens get out of Gaza.

“People who want to leave should be able to, freely, and there are countries that want to absorb them,” the official stated. 

Israel is still not allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza. The official said that the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, a combined IDF-civilian unit that deals with aid, among other matters in the West Bank and Gaza, “is constantly monitoring, and if there is not enough food, the information will be given to decision-makers.”

“We have no obligation to feed the war machines of the enemy’s economy,” the official added. “The trucks strengthened Hamas’ economy … It was their main source of income. It led us to think about how to prevent this phenomenon.”

New Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa discussed last week his conditions for normalizing relations with Israel with Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), who was one of the first American lawmakers to visit the country since the overthrow of the Assad regime.

Al-Sharaa’s apparent openness to normalization is a striking step given his history as a fighter and leader in Al-Qaida and ISIS, and the campaign of Israeli military strikes against Syria, motivated by concerns about al-Sharaa and other new Syrian leaders’ jihadist pasts, among other issues.

During a meeting at the presidential palace in Damascus, al-Sharaa told Stutzman that his concerns regarding Syria’s relationship with Israel are keeping Syria as a unified country and not allowing regions to be divided off, Israel’s military encroachment into Syria around the Golan Heights and the Israeli bombing campaign targeting Syrian military assets. 

Al-Sharaa said any agreement with Israel would have to address those points, but Stutzman told Jewish Insider last week that “outside of those couple of items — and I’m sure there’s going to be other issues that he would bring to the table, but [al-Sharaa] was open to those conversations about normalizing relations with Israel.” Stutzman said he felt al-Sharaa was being honest and upfront about those conditions.

He said they did not specifically address the issue of whether al-Sharaa’s government is seeking to reclaim the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in the Six-Day War in 1967. Israel has floated the prospect of attempting to create and protect an autonomous zone for the Druze minority in southern Syria and strongly opposes any sanctions relief for the regime, as has been floated by lawmakers in the U.S.

The congressman noted that al-Sharaa used the word “Israel” on various occasions, rather than using euphemisms like “Zionist [entity]” preferred by Israel’s antagonists in the region, which Stutzman suggested was a positive sign.

The Indiana congressman said he believed al-Sharaa, who some in the United States and Israel — including members of the Trump administration — think still harbors jihadist aims, is sincere in his interest in reforming Syria and moving beyond Islamist extremism. 

“He sees the prosperity of the West, it seems to me like he may want to be a part of that, and I think that’s something we should be open to,” Stutzman explained. “His past is dubious. We can’t ignore it. But at the same time, it seems like he’s stretching a hand to the West to have a dialogue.”

Stutzman called for a “trust-but-verify approach” to the new regime. He said that he and al-Sharaa had discussed the issue of lifting U.S. sanctions, which Stutzman said would ultimately be a decision best left to President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 

“He wanted to keep Syria unified. That was a really top priority for him,” Stutzman said. “And respecting all human rights, religious rights, he seemed agreeable to that. Actions speak louder than words, and that’s what we have to watch, but I truly believe that we should be engaging in a conversation with him.”

“He’s already pushing Hezbollah and the Iranians out of the region, and he has a good relationship with Turkey for the most part, and is reaching out to the countries in the Middle East,” Stutzman added, saying that welcoming members of Congress into the country for an unrestricted visit was another positive sign.

Stutzman said he believes al-Sharaa is currently committed to keeping Iran, Russia and China out of Syria, but said that if al-Sharaa cannot find friends in the West, he will likely turn to American adversaries.

He said that al-Sharaa is highly interested in building economic relationships with Gulf states and making Syria peaceful and prosperous.

“He was very thoughtful and measured, but you could tell a couple of times he got excited, he was getting excited when I asked him about his vision for Syria economically, and he started talking about trade and commerce and tourism and the relationship with Qatar and Saudi Arabia and UAE, and the fact that they could be an energy resource to the West as well as trade routes,” Stutzman said.

Al-Sharaa pitched to Stutzman plans to build rail lines and trucking routes through Syria to the Gulf and the West to cut down shipping times, as well as a gas line to Europe that could help undermine Russia’s energy dominance.

The Indiana lawmaker noted that he was particularly struck by the fact that a Christian woman, Hind Kabawat, is a member of al-Sharaa’s Cabinet. She met with Stutzman and Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL), who also traveled to Syria, and took them to meet with other Christian leaders.

He said that he was also impressed by al-Sharaa’s opening of the presidential palace to the Syrian people. 

Stutzman added that, in general, he saw a sense of optimism among the Syrian people, which “shows you how bad it was before.” He added, “their spirit is not broken,” drawing stark contrasts between his visit to Syria and the dejected people he saw on a visit to Russia in 1995 after the fall of the Soviet Union.

“There seemed to be a sense of hope and optimism,” he said. “The opportunities there are endless if President al-Sharaa takes advantage of it.”

He said that Christian leaders in Syria with whom he met were aware of but did not seem especially worried by al-Sharaa’s jihadist background. The Christian leaders noted that al-Sharaa’s father was an academic, that some of them had known al-Sharaa in their school days and that al-Sharaa, while a member of terrorist groups, had been fighting against the Assad regime.

The surprise trip came about through long relationships between Stutzman and members of the Syrian American community, including the leaders of the Syrian American advocacy group that organized the trip, who live in Indiana.

“I’ve learned a lot from them, and they asked me to be supportive of lifting sanctions,” Stutzman said. “I said, ‘It’s hard to just say that without knowing more and seeing what’s on the ground.’ And so the opportunity came to go over, and that’s why I went.”

Arab and Israeli leaders are insisting that any U.S. deal with Iran also include provisions to address Iran’s other malign activities in the region, including support for terrorist proxies, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) told Jewish Insider following a trip earlier this month to meet with Israeli and Arab leaders in the Middle East.

Wasserman Schultz traveled with Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) to the Middle East for the third time since Oct. 7, 2023, visiting Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Jordan.

“There was a very clear urgency that the leaders we spoke to had to make sure that we … don’t let Iran up from their very weakened state. They’ve been badly pummeled and had significant defeats,” Wasserman Schultz told JI last week. “The consensus across the region, no matter where we went, was that we needed to make sure that continued and that we prevented them from achieving their nuclear weapons goals and that we particularly prevented them from continuing their support for terrorist activity.”

She said that notion was raised by multiple leaders without prompting from the U.S. lawmakers.

She said that “across the board” the leaders shared her view that any deal with Iran must “include defanging them — and that was a term that was used repeatedly, defanging them — and stopping them from continuing to terrorize” the region.

“It was made very clear to us it was not enough to just negotiate over their nuclear ambitions, that in their weakened state, you could not separate Iran’s malignancy when it comes to all of their activity — particularly if they got any relief from sanctions,” she said.

Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, the lead negotiator for the U.S. in talks with Iran, suggested in a recent Fox News interview that the U.S. would consider allowing Iran to retain its enrichment capacity as part of a deal — a statement he later walked back — while Wasserman Schultz and Ernst were in the region. The outline Witkoff provided on Fox appeared to many to be equivalent to the original 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action which Trump withdrew from in his first term.

Wasserman Schultz called it “incredibly hypocritical” for officials from the new Trump administration, such as Witkoff, to endorse terms of a deal similar to the JCPOA. Wasserman Schultz ultimately voted for the JCPOA in 2015 and calls it “the most difficult vote I’ve cast in all the years I’ve been in Congress.”

She called on Witkoff and the American negotiators to seek a deal stronger than the original JCPOA, making her the latest pro-Israel Democrat to raise concerns about the potential terms of a new deal with Iran. 

She said she’s “frustrated and concerned … and even angry” that the administration seems to be going “from pillar to post. Their discussions seem like they’re happening on quicksand and I have seen nothing that looks different than the agreement that [Trump] pulled out of.”

With Iran significantly weaker and more vulnerable than it was in 2015, Wasserman Schultz said the U.S. must seize the opportunity to push for a more comprehensive deal to prevent Iranian terrorist activity and stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

If the U.S. does return to a deal similar to the JCPOA, Wasserman Schultz said that the ultimate result of Trump’s withdrawal from the original deal would have been allowing Iran to get “perilously close to a nuclear weapon” and removing the option to strengthen the original agreement through further negotiations.

Wasserman Schultz said that she told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who aggressively opposed the 2015 deal, that she expected he would offer “the same howling pushback that occurred back during the Obama years when those negotiations were taking place” if Trump moves toward a deal similar to the JCPOA.

Wasserman Schultz and Ernst also discussed the ongoing war with Hamas in their meeting with Netanyahu. Compared to previous meetings, Wasserman Schultz said she believed that the prime minister and Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer outlined more comprehensive and specific strategies to achieve the release of the remaining hostages being held in Gaza.

“I probably have met with him five or six times over the course of the last year and a half there in Israel and in the U.S.,” Wasserman Schultz explained. “I was glad to see that they had varying approaches in terms of their negotiations and strategy with the ceasefire and hostage deals that they’re discussing. I was glad to see that and hear for the first time Dermer — and Netanyahu too — talk about the various options that they had, as opposed to it being a more minimalist conversation.”

Wasserman Schultz said she and Ernst had also spoken to Arab leaders about their proposals for post-war Gaza and achieving Saudi-Israeli normalization. She said the Arab leaders had been “very clear-eyed” about the difficulties of finding credible Palestinian leadership able to help move toward an eventual Palestinian state, but said they believed it was possible.

“I came away feeling like there could be some progress made. But it was clear that as a result of the war in Gaza, the signs of progress that we had hoped for when we were in Saudi Arabia on the night of Oct. 6 [2023] [were] further away at the moment than [they were] then,” Wasserman Schultz said. 

But she added that the countries which have normalized relations with Israel are not retreating from those agreements and remain committed to them, highlighting as one example of the progress made that she was able to attend a Seder on the first night of Passover in Abu Dhabi.

Jewish leaders in Georgia say that Sen. Jon Ossoff’s (D-GA) reversal in early April on efforts to block U.S. aid to Israel marks an important step toward repairing relations with the Jewish community, but several said that he’ll need to do more and show he’ll remain on that track going forward to regain their trust.

Ossoff’s votes last November in favor of resolutions led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) attempting to block arms sales to Israel shocked and frustrated Jewish Democrats in Georgia, who could help tip what might be a razor-thin margin of victory in Ossoff’s 2026 reelection campaign. The November votes prompted condemnation from a coalition of 50 Jewish organizations in Georgia and led a group of Democratic donors to offer to support Republican Gov. Brian Kemp if he runs for the seat.

Norman Radow, a major Democratic donor in Georgia, told Jewish Insider that Ossoff’s April votes against anti-Israel resolutions again brought by Sanders, are “helpful. I think we want that to continue.” But he noted that Ossoff had not apologized for his previous votes and comments. He said he appreciated Ossoff’s latest votes and comments, but said he wanted to see them become part of a consistent pattern, rather than a momentary shift.

“My fear is that that’s the real Jon, and that our political pressure and his running for reelection has temporarily moved him towards our position,” Radow continued. “I’m hoping that he recognizes the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and that he will not only support us, but he’ll become a champion for the U.S.-Israel relationship and the Jewish community. That’s my hope.”

David Lubin, a former Democratic state Senate candidate, said that Ossoff’s latest votes were “exactly what we wanted to see happen.” He noted that Ossoff had also recently attended a play at a local Jewish day school, describing his attendance as an additional sign that Ossoff understands the frustration within the Jewish community and realizes that he has work to do.

“The healing process — I think it will take more for a lot of people,” Lubin continued. “I think it’s hard for people to explain why he voted that way, which makes it difficult for Democrats when you’re talking to people that are on the fence on who to vote for … The healing part is going to be tough, I think, for people that put Israel as one of their top priorities.”

Aaron Goldman, another Democratic Georgia donor, said that Ossoff had heard and responded to the widespread outcry from the Jewish community following the November votes and deserved thanks for his pivot. Goldman added that he wanted to see it followed by similar votes and actions, and called on Ossoff to remain communicative with and available to the Jewish community ahead of consequential votes on Israel, as well as to be more vocal in support of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

“Our door is open. We are here to work with him collaboratively, to support the U.S.-Israel relationship, which has historically been a strong Democratic value,” Goldman said.

Dov Wilker, the regional director of the American Jewish Committee in Atlanta, which was a lead signatory to the organizational letter, told JI, “We’re pleased with the direction of the senator’s votes and hope that his continued engagement with the Jewish community on behalf of the hostages, in support of Israel will continue.”

Cheryl Dorchinsky, the founder of Atlanta Israel Coalition, a grassroots pro-Israel nonprofit that signed the letter from local pro-Israel groups, told JI that she was “thrilled [Ossoff] changed his stance” which was “truly a sign that he was listening.” Dorchinsky declined to say whether she had supported Ossoff previously and said she does not associate with either political party.

“I think he has more to do,” Dorchinsky continued. “Now it’s about seeing how he votes and how he acts from that point moving forward. I applaud him for changing his stance … [but] it’s like if you kick someone, the pain doesn’t just go away. You wait, you heal, and you hope for the best.”

Dov Wilker, the regional director of the American Jewish Committee in Atlanta, which was a lead signatory to the organizational letter, told JI, “We’re pleased with the direction of the senator’s votes and hope that his continued engagement with the Jewish community on behalf of the hostages, in support of Israel will continue.”

Others in the community believe that Ossoff has addressed their concerns.

Lori Kagan Schwarz, a former board co-chair and current trustee of the Jewish Federation of Greater Atlanta, said she was “hugely disappointed and upset” by Ossoff’s votes in November. But she said his public advocacy against the similar resolutions in April had helped address her concerns, along with direct engagement with his staff. She said she believes that Ossoff was “surprised” by the level of outcry from Democratic Jews following the November votes. 

Kagan Schwarz said that many Jewish Georgians she knows “were so upset by his vote in November, and even before he voted against the most recent resolution, they were encouraged by his outreach, by his words and actions.”

She added that supporters of Israel should and will continue to advocate to Ossoff, as they do with all elected leaders. “I’m not concerned at all, but I’m vigilant in terms of my advocacy and my deep concern for Israel.”

Both Goldman and Radow emphasized that it was not only Ossoff’s votes but also his floor speech in favor of the Sanders resolutions, in which Ossoff said Israel’s conduct of the war in Gaza had been “gratuitously brutal” and that it had shown “reckless disregard for the innocent,” that they and others had found particularly objectionable.

“Last November, Senator Ossoff was wrong to vote with Bernie Sanders to jeopardize Israel’s security as it fights a seven-front war against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists,” AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann said. “His recent vote was a notable step to rectify his previous mistake.”

Ossoff said following the April votes that he felt the new resolutions “would have been damaging” and that all focus should be on restoring a ceasefire and freeing the remaining hostages.

AIPAC was one of the lead signatories on the Jewish organizational letter. AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told JI that the April vote had been a step to correct Ossoff’s past moves.

“Last November, Senator Ossoff was wrong to vote with Bernie Sanders to jeopardize Israel’s security as it fights a seven-front war against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists,” Wittmann said. “His recent vote was a notable step to rectify his previous mistake.”

There are some members of the Jewish community who supported Ossoff’s initial votes.

“Many of us in the Jewish community feel like it’s reasonable to want to see an end to the killing of innocent people and of course a return of the hostages,” Jodi Greenwald, a Jewish Ossoff supporter, told JI. “Jon Ossoff has supported Israel in so many ways and so many votes, and I think he’s just going with a reasonable approach to minimize the damage of loss of innocent life. I personally was not upset by that. I certainly did not interpret it as an abandonment of his support for Israel.”

Greenwald told JI that she felt the letter from 50 Jewish organizations criticizing Ossoff misrepresented the level of support for those views among the members of those institutions. 

Lubin, the former state Senate candidate, said that for some in the community, frustrations with Ossoff were not limited to the Sanders votes, but rather reflected a broader sense that he was not standing with members of the Jewish community, even at a time of rampant antisemitism. Lubin said he’s concerned that Ossoff’s November votes were reflective of a larger and deeper pattern than just a few votes. Other previous Ossoff supporters echoed that view.

Kagan Schwarz disagreed that there has been a broader pattern of concern with Ossoff. “It never occurred to me that he was not hugely a proponent against antisemitism.”

She added that supporters of Israel “have to be a little accepting of people expressing concern about Israel’s leadership, especially right now.” She argued that such criticisms don’t mean that someone is not a supporter of Israel. “I love Israel and want to do everything I can to protect and preserve her. But it doesn’t mean that I love Israel’s government.

Radow said that Ossoff, after the November votes, avoided his and other longtime, major Jewish supporters’ outreach for months, until a February New York Times article highlighted Jewish donors interested in supporting a Kemp campaign.

Ossoff subsequently sat down with a group of around 50 Jewish leaders from Georgia, including Radow, at an AIPAC conference in Washington in February, where the Jewish leaders confronted him about his past votes and urged him to commit to supporting a series of three priority legislative initiatives.

Radow said that Ossoff, at the meeting, was not willing to commit to any of the three, including voting against further Sanders resolutions; however, Ossoff did so days after the meeting. He said Ossoff had tried to avoid discussing his past remarks and votes and told the leaders that they would have to agree to disagree, but the Jewish leaders pushed back.

“Jon is not out of the woodshed but he did come and meet with 50 of us. He spent an hour. He did meet with me privately for 45 minutes. He has voted for us on three important pieces of legislation since then,” Norman Radow, a major Democratic donor in Georgia, said. “I hope that that relationship can continue to build and we can reestablish trust.”

“What surprised me was, he’s coming to that audience, he was not prepared then to say he’d participate [in] or support any of the three,” Radow said. “It took him days, and all these issues were out there. He’d been contacted in advance. All this legislation was on his desk, and he hadn’t prepared for it.”

Radow also met privately with Ossoff following the AIPAC sit-down, where he said they had an “honest” and “forthright” discussion and “made progress.”

“Jon is not out of the woodshed but he did come and meet with 50 of us. He spent an hour. He did meet with me privately for 45 minutes. He has voted for us on three important pieces of legislation since then,” Radow said. “I hope that that relationship can continue to build and we can reestablish trust.”

Ossoff’s deputy chief of staff met separately with at least two groups of Jewish Democratic female leaders in Georgia, including Kagan Schwarz, in late March. The meetings were organized in collaboration with members of the Jewish Democratic Women’s Salon.

Kagan Schwarz said that Ossoff’s staffer told the group that Ossoff had heard the feedback from the Jewish community and wanted to keep an open conversation with community members. She said that the Ossoff staffer was open to discussing all of their concerns and explaining Ossoff’s November votes and why his positions had shifted since then.

She added that Ossoff’s staffer also highlighted other actions he’d taken in support of Jewish community priorities, like numerous meetings with hostage families and working with law enforcement to ensure adequate security for the Jewish community following Oct. 7 — reassuring actions Kagan Schwarz said Ossoff’s office should have better publicized.

Lubin said that, to rebuild bridges with those hurt by his past actions, Ossoff will need to continue to be present in the Jewish community, reach out to Jewish leaders and “make it clear that he is supporting Israel” and that he fully grasps the significance of the fight that Israel is facing. “It seems like there’s some disconnect with him, in regards to that,” Lubin said.

Going forward, Dorchinsky called on Ossoff to be more active in fighting antisemitism.

“Stand up for us. We are part of this community,” Dorchinsky said. “It’s not just impacting us, it impacts everyone … Our representatives are responsible for protecting their communities, regardless of religion.”

Radow, who signed the letter to Kemp encouraging him to run against Ossoff, said that he hasn’t yet made a decision on who he’ll support in 2026.

“It would be imprudent of me to say I would support Jon, not support Jon, until, A, I see how Jon continues to act in the next 18 months and, two, who the Republicans put up,” Radow said. “If it’s Marjorie Taylor Greene, I think the decision is clear.”

Goldman, who also signed onto the letter expressing support for Kemp, said that letter “reflected the frustration and the disappointment” in the community.

But Goldman noted that Kemp appears unlikely to run and that Ossoff “has shown his willingness to listen and deliberate and make a vote more reflective of not only his Jewish constituencies, but Georgia voters as a whole, and where they are on Israel … A continuation in that trend, as we’ve discussed, would be very comforting to Jewish Democrats in general.”

Lubin said he can’t yet speak firmly to how he will vote in 2026, given the many unknowns between now and the election, though he’s currently inclined to vote for Ossoff.

“There is concern to see that if we get closer, and other things do come up and he wavers too much, I think a lot of people will be looking at who to vote for,” Lubin said. “I can’t tell you where I’m going to vote in a couple of years from now.”

Lubin added that Ossoff’s April votes and outreach to the Jewish community will help some Democrats who were previously on the fence feel better about voting for him. He agreed that if Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) becomes the Republican nominee, many otherwise undecided Democratic Jews will likely line up behind Ossoff.

“I think that folks who are abandoning support for a Georgia senator based on just one vote about one element of support to Israel and willing to throw everything else good that he does and supports and is for away in our representation in the Senate — I think that’s not in the interests of our lives as Georgians,” Jodi Greenwald, a Jewish Ossoff supporter, said. “He’s been a friend to the people of Georgia regardless of their faith.”

If the GOP nominee is someone like Rep. Buddy Carter (D-GA), a supporter of the Jewish community, or Insurance Commissioner John King, viewed as a moderate, that could raise a trickier dilemma for voters than an Ossoff-Greene race, one individual familiar with the situation noted. Jewish Democratic voters may also be faced with questions of how and whether to vote tactically in the primaries — to vote in next year’s Democratic gubernatorial primary or the GOP Senate primary.

Kagan Schwarz, an Ossoff supporter, said that Israel is one of her top issues, but she wants to see the candidates she supports be strong “on all my key issues, not just one,” and described Ossoff as the clear choice. She said she was “very disappointed” by the letter from Jewish donors to Kemp and would not have signed it — though she said she does not “begrudge” the signatories and said it “might have been a wake-up call” for Ossoff.

“I think that folks who are abandoning support for a Georgia senator based on just one vote about one element of support to Israel and willing to throw everything else good that he does and supports and is for away in our representation in the Senate — I think that’s not in the interests of our lives as Georgians,” Greenwald said. “He’s been a friend to the people of Georgia regardless of their faith.”

Holocaust Survivor Avigdor Neuman told his story in front of the Knesset’s Chagall tapestries, in Jerusalem. In Hostages Square in Tel Aviv, thousands gathered to hear survivor Aliza Landau recount her experiences, along with the parents of hostages speaking about their sons’ continued captivity in Gaza. Dozens of teenage volunteer EMTs gathered at a Magen David Adom ambulance station in northern Israel to hear Holocaust survivor David Peleg speak. Women gathered in a Pilates studio in central Israel to hear a fellow member share her mother’s story of survival. 

And in hundreds of living rooms around Israel on Wednesday evening, Holocaust survivors or their children told countless stories to small groups. In the days leading up to Yom Hashoah, which began at sundown Wednesday, Israelis using the navigation app Waze could see the locations of such events and find links to sign up. One of those locations, in the central Israel city of Hod Hasharon, is the home of Adi Altschuler, the founder of Zikaron BaSalon – “memory in the living room.”

In between preparations to host 40 people for her own Yom Hashoah event, Altschuler spoke to Jewish Insider about how her initiative has become a ubiquitous way for Israelis to mark Yom Hashoah, the day that Israel commemorates the Holocaust. Over 2 million people attended Zikaron BaSalon events across the world this year, according to Altschuler.

Altschuler, 38, is an award-winning social entrepreneur who has been a well-known name in Israel for over 20 years since, as a teenager, she founded a youth movement for children with and without special needs to do activities together. 

The idea for Zikaron BaSalon brewed slowly, beginning in 2010, when she forgot about Yom Hashoah altogether, Altschuler said.

“I don’t have a personal family connection to the Holocaust,” she recounted. “I felt that I couldn’t connect to the topic … I was scared of it and deterred from it.” 

Altschuler heard sad music on the radio one day, and then talked to her mother on the phone and asked if something tragic had happened – because in Israel, when there is a terror attack, the music stations only play sad songs. Her mother reminded her that Yom Hashoah was beginning in a few hours and asked her how she planned to commemorate the day.

“I said, I don’t know, maybe I’ll watch ‘Schindler’s List,’” Altschuler said. “My mother was angry with me, so I went with her to a ceremony in Tel Aviv. I was 24 years old and I was the only one there who was under 60.”

“That was when it occurred to me that I am part of the last generation who will meet Holocaust survivors … I said to myself, what will Yom Hashoah look like in 30 years? … What will happen when there aren’t survivors anymore?” she asked.

Altschuler said she thought Yom Hashoah could end up either like Tisha B’Av – the day on which Jews fast to mark the destruction of the Temple, and something that most Israelis don’t observe – or the Passover Seder, which over 90% of Israeli Jews observe.

The following Yom Hashoah, Altschuler once again looked for a way to mark the day, and went to the same ceremony in Tel Aviv. On the way to her car, she heard shouting from an apartment, and could see through the windows that people her age were watching a soccer game.

“I thought, this is why people aren’t at the ceremony. They’re in their living rooms,” she said.

That was when the idea for Zikaron BaSalon started to come together. A year after that, Altschuler invited a Holocaust survivor to her home to tell her story, and 10 friends to hear her. Ultimately, 40 people attended.

For Altschuler, hearing a survivor’s testimony “took the big story of 6 million and turned it into the story of one person,” helping her connect. 

And the survivor herself, who had previously been intimidated by the idea of speaking at Yad Vashem or an entire school, had a chance to tell her story. The survivor started by saying “I hope I won’t disappoint you,” because she was hidden as a child and did not survive a concentration camp. Altschuler said these events, which feature a broad range of survivors with varying experiences, also give recognition to people whose Holocaust stories are different from what people are used to hearing.

“For the survivors who are still with us,” Altschuler said, “they want to be remembered and they want us to remember those who are not with us. It gives them a lot of strength, even when it is difficult for them to tell their stories.”

Altschuler and her friends asked questions and at the end, a friend took out a guitar and they sang songs.

“It wasn’t a ceremony that was forced on us. We created the experience,” she said. “We started a conversation about what we need to remember and what we can learn today. We even argued. It wasn’t sterile. But there was something in the informality of a living room that was right and authentic.” 

Altschuler then asked everyone who was in her living room to invite people to their homes the following year, which meant there were 40 salons in Israel, plus one in south Florida, where a friend of Altschuler’s lived, and where there is a large concentration of Holocaust survivors. 

In the ensuing years, Zikaron BaSalon expanded to 2 million attendees across 65 countries — 1.5 million of whom are in Israel. The president of Germany hosts one each year. Israel’s three major TV channels broadcast live from the events. 

After the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, Altschuler said hearing survivors’ stories had an even deeper meaning: “Zikaron BaSalon gives us hope and shows us how we can get up again after the most destabilizing metaphysical event in human history. These people rose and started families and established a country. We can absorb those values and they give us hope now.”

Altschuler encouraged people around the world to host their own events, noting that the Zikaron BaSalon has resources in many languages and volunteers around the world who can provide kits to prospective hosts. 

“You can do one with your family, or you can do something big — just do it. Just decide to take this responsibility to host, to tell the story … so it’s like a tradition, like a Seder, that our children will grow up with,” she said. 

“The most amazing thing is this doesn’t belong to anyone. My name isn’t on the website,” Altschuler said. “It’s a social movement of individual people who decided to take responsibility for remembering the Holocaust and did it in their own way.”

On the morning of Monday, May 13, 1996, David Boim, an American teenager studying abroad at a yeshiva in Israel, was waiting at a bus stop, en route to his parents’ home in Jerusalem, when two Hamas terrorists drove by and opened fire, shooting him in the head.

Pronounced dead within an hour, Boim, who was 17, was one of the first Americans killed by Hamas, which the United States soon designated as a foreign terrorist organization. In the ensuing years, Boim’s parents, Stanley and Joyce, have continued to fight for a measure of accountability through the American court system.

Now, almost 30 years after Boim’s death, his parents’ quest for justice seems poised to finally reach its apex as their lawsuit against a leading pro-Palestinian advocacy group with alleged ties to Hamas nears a possible trial by what legal experts say could be the end of the year.

With the discovery process recently closed, Daniel Schlessinger, the Boims’ lead attorney, believes his team has, since filing its lawsuit in 2017, built a convincing case against American Muslims for Palestine, accused of acting as an “alter ego” of a now-defunct group that shut down after it was found to have provided support to Hamas.

Founded in 2006, AMP describes itself on its website as “a grassroots organization dedicated to advancing the movement for justice in Palestine by educating the American public about Palestine and its rich cultural, historical and religious heritage and through grassroots mobilization and advocacy.”

But the group has recently come under intense scrutiny, owing in large part to its involvement in anti-Israel protests on college campuses that are a target of the Trump administration’s crackdown on foreign students accused of supporting terrorism.

“If you don’t want to be identified as a terrorist organization,” Daniel Schlessinger, the Boims’ lead attorney told Jewish Insider, “why in the world would you hire as your executive director the guy who was the executive director of this predecessor organization that has been found to be a supporter of terror?”

In constructing its argument, Schlessinger said his team has assembled “overwhelming” evidence that shows AMP is a continuation of the Islamic Association of Palestine, which was ruled liable for Boim’s murder in a related case nearly two decades ago.

Among other close parallels cited by Schlessinger, top officials at AMP — many of whom have ties to Hamas — were once affiliated with IAP, in what he characterized as a “dramatic” overlap of leadership. When AMP formed soon after IAP had shut down in 2004, for instance, “the key player in the day-to-day functioning of AMP was the same guy who was the key player in the day-to-day functioning of IAP,” he said, referring to Abdelbaset Hamayel, a former top IAP official who also served as AMP’s first executive director and still manages its books and records.

“If you don’t want to be identified as a terrorist organization,” Schlessinger told Jewish Insider, “why in the world would you hire as your executive director the guy who was the executive director of this predecessor organization that has been found to be a supporter of terror?”

In addition, Schlessinger argues, AMP had quickly established itself as a formidable organization with widely attended conferences and a deep reserve of institutional resources because it “inherited” IAP’s business and operational methods as well as email lists, donors and convention speakers. AMP, Schlessinger notes, held a convention immediately after its launch in the same location in Illinois that IAP hosted its events, which he views as a key early reference point for establishing how the two groups are identical in all but their names.

AMP denies that it is an alter ego of IAP, claiming it does not support Hamas and has never sent money overseas as the earlier group did. 

“What these eight years of litigation have in fact shown,” said Christina Jump, an attorney for AMP, in a statement to JI on Tuesday, “is that, contrary to the desires of the plaintiffs and those to whom they identify wanting to provide more information, if they could, American Muslims for Palestine operates in the United States for the purely legal purpose of educating the American public about the rich history and culture of Palestine.”

***

As the lawsuit enters its final stages, previously unreported legal documents reviewed by JI and shared by the Boims’ attorneys also provide some revealing insight into AMP, a secretive group that has faced growing scrutiny in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks.

The materials, including sworn depositions from several key AMP officials, strikingly guarded in their interviews, indicate that the group has obscured its connections to IAP, while further highlighting how some of its leaders have been closely tied to Hamas.

For example, Rafeeq Jaber, the former president of IAP who has prepared AMP’s tax forms, insisted in a two-part deposition taken in January that he has had no official involvement with AMP — even as the Boims’ legal team produced several records such as email correspondence showing he organized for the group and served as its representative in meetings.

Jaber, who was responsible for winding down IAP’s affairs when it closed in 2004, is the sole individual defendant named in the Boim case along with AMP, which formally identifies in tax filings as Americans for Justice in Palestine Educational Foundation, the group’s fiscal sponsor.

In one notable comment during discovery, Jaber readily acknowledged he supported Moussa Abu Marzouk, a senior Hamas official and a founder of IAP, when he lived in the U.S. in the 1990s. But he declined to weigh in on Marzouk’s current activities, suggesting he was unwilling to impart judgment on Hamas. “That’s his business now,” Jaber remarked in a characteristically curt response. “He’s not here anymore.”

More broadly, the materials shed additional light on the extent to which AMP has embraced an extremist approach to the conflict between Israel and Hamas — even as its leaders are for the most part seemingly careful not to voice explicit support for the terrorist group and are typically evasive in their comments.

Four days before Hamas’ attacks, for instance, Osama Abu Irshaid, the executive director of AMP who had previously edited IAP’s newspaper, said in his deposition, parts of which are confidential, that he would not share his current position on Hamas. In a 2014 social media post produced in discovery, he had written that the group commands “respect” because it “believes in the principle and negotiates from a position of strength,” according to his own translation. 

Abu Irshaid, who weeks later actively led campus protests in the wake of Hamas’ attacks and the ensuing war in Gaza, said he did not recall publishing the post, but agreed with the content, which he characterized as analysis rather than an endorsement. 

But he refused to confirm or deny if he now supports the principles Hamas stood for at the time of his post in 2014. “I’m not going to speak about my own convictions at the time, or today, or tomorrow,” he said, sounding frustrated by the line of questioning. “Or let me rephrase, I’m not going to say whether I support or not. What I support is the restoration of the Palestinian human rights in full.”

As to the fulfillment of that goal, Taher Herzallah, the director of outreach and grassroots organizing for AMP who has venerated Palestinian martyrdom, stated equivocally that the events of Oct. 7 “may be defined as resistance,” but then added he was only speaking objectively. “I haven’t thought about that so much,” he said in a deposition taken last month.

Later, echoing a view expressed by Jaber, Herzallah said that he would define Palestine as “between the Jordan River and east of the Mediterranean,” using a modified slogan that is widely interpreted as a call to eliminate Israel and has appeared with increasing regularity on college campuses, where he has helped organize protests.     

Salah Sarsour, an AMP national board member who has previously raised funds for Hamas, was equally circumspect in his own responses in January 2024, at one point softening the language he had used in a social media comment he was asked to translate from Arabic. 

“Oh, God! I ask you to give Gaza people victory and take care of those who want harm for people of Gaza from zealots and hypocrites,” he said in translation, but then acknowledged that “take care” could mean “destroy,” as the Boims’ attorneys suggested. “Same meaning,” he said. “Take care of them. Like, punish them.”

In 1995, Sarsour spent eight months in an Israeli prison for supporting Hamas and shared a cell with a senior Hamas commander, Adel Awadallah, with whom he “became close friends,” according to Matthew Levitt’s 2006 book Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad. 

But speaking in his deposition, Sarsour said he was not aware of Awadallah’s history and did not know whether he was a member of Hamas. “I’m not here to judge people,” Sarsour stated. “I don’t know.”

Despite what Schlessinger described as attempts at obfuscation on the part of the defendants, he believes his team is well positioned for trial. “I think we have a very strong case on the facts and I would like to say on the law,” he averred. “We have a ton of evidence.”

***

The Boims’ lawsuit, which is among several legal challenges targeting AMP that have more recently emerged, threatens to dismantle one of the nation’s leading pro-Palestinian organizations, as it has assumed an increasingly prominent role in the activist fervor fueled by the Hamas attacks and ensuing war, particularly on college campuses.

If the case succeeds, it would also be a major step toward fulfilling a significant but short-lived victory from 2004, when the family won a $156 million judgment against a network of affiliated nonprofits, including IAP, that the Boims claimed had provided material support to Hamas and were liable for their son’s murder under the Anti-Terrorism Act, which allows American victims of international terrorism to seek damages in the U.S. It was the first instance in which the law had been successfully used to reach a judgement, cementing it as a landmark decision.

The judgment, however, has never been fully paid. One of the groups, the Holy Land Foundation, had been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. and shut down in 2001. Five of its leaders were also convicted of aiding Hamas and sent to prison in an unrelated 2008 trial that was described at the time as the largest terror financing case in the U.S. since the Sept. 11 attacks. (Hamas leadership has continued to call for their release as recently as last month.)

“This group’s leaders have ties to Hamas and helped create the group Students for Justice in Palestine,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), the committee chairman, said in a statement, referring to a loosely organized student advocacy group that has voiced support for Hamas while at the forefront of post-Oct. 7 protests.

IAP, the HLF’s media arm, shuttered soon after the ruling, claiming that the Boim case had depleted its assets and rendered it operationally defunct. Years later, however, in 2017, the Boims filed a new suit in Illinois invoking a legal argument typically reserved for corporate cases to allege that AMP is an alter ego of IAP and therefore responsible for the uncollected judgement. The case faced several initial roadblocks but was allowed to move forward on appeal — and a judge rejected AMP’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit in 2022.

***

In the past year, AMP has drawn a growing number of legal challenges and government probes alleging that the group provides material support to Hamas. In Virginia, for example, AMP has been named in at least two lawsuits, including an investigation led by the Republican attorney general, who is seeking to enforce a Richmond judge’s order that requires the group turn over financial records that could help to shed light on its donor network — which it has long kept closely guarded.

Last month, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee launched an investigation into AMP over its engagement on college campuses. “This group’s leaders have ties to Hamas and helped create the group Students for Justice in Palestine,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), the committee chairman, said in a statement, referring to a loosely organized student advocacy group that has voiced support for Hamas while at the forefront of post-Oct. 7 protests.

The Boims’ lawsuit has in some ways dovetailed with such efforts — many of which have cited the case as a touchstone. “To my mind, this case is the gold standard,” Asaf Romirowsky, a historian of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict who has closely followed the Boim lawsuit, told JI. “All these other cases, and really a lot of the lawfare that has taken place, really all stems from this case.”

Like the terror financing cases of the early 2000s, the Boim suit in particular “could bring down the financial architecture” of an activist network that has thrived in a post-Oct. 7 political climate while “fomenting antisemitism” on college campuses and promoting boycott campaigns against Israel, said Romirowsky. “This is a linchpin here that can make that happen,” he added, noting that the case could also ultimately reveal “what’s behind the curtain.”

“I think there are a lot of people who are going to be looking at this case for perhaps other insights into what’s happened since Oct. 7,” he said. But the alter ego allegation is “the only thing that truly matters here,” said Jonathan Schanzer, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank and an expert on terror financing who has tracked the Boim case, and “if folks are smart, they’re going to just look at the intent of the case.”

In building its own case against AMP, however, the Boims’ legal team does not need to show the group has actively provided support to Hamas, in contrast with other suits requiring a higher burden of proof. Even as Schlessinger said he plans to establish that AMP has aided Hamas by helping to raise funds for such groups as Viva Palestina, a British organization that has allegedly given financial support to Hamas officials, “that’s not key to our case,” he explained to JI.

“All we have to do is prove AMP is essentially the same organization as IAP,” he said. “We’ve proven that IAP provided material support to Hamas.”

Jonathan Schanzer, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank and an expert on terror financing who has tracked the Boim case, said critics of AMP may be tempted to read too deeply into the legal materials that will emerge from the lawsuit. “I think there are a lot of people who are going to be looking at this case for perhaps other insights into what’s happened since Oct. 7,” he said. But the alter ego allegation is “the only thing that truly matters here,” he told JI, and “if folks are smart, they’re going to just look at the intent of the case.”

***

Still, Schlessinger said he intends to demonstrate that AMP, like its alleged predecessor, has actively fostered support for Hamas, including through its close affiliation with SJP’s national umbrella group, which it has provided with financial resources and training. SJP, which published a widely scrutinized organizing toolkit shortly after Hamas’ attacks that called for the “complete liberation” of the Palestinians and for “dismantling Zionism,” was purportedly co-founded by Hatem Bazian, the founder of AMP who serves as its national board chair.

In his deposition, however, Bazian claimed he had not been a co-founder of SJP as a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley in the early 1990s, even when presented with a legal complaint he filed in Arizona in 2018 explicitly describing himself as such, which he called an error. “Most SJPs — or most campus organizing” for Palestinian causes “is actually done by Jewish students,” Bazian insisted last April.

Bazian, who spoke at IAP events before he formed AMP, also distanced his group from affiliation with Hamas, but did not share any condemnation of the terrorist organization. Instead, he stated that AMP does not allow donations to Hamas because it is a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, “and any individual that attends our conference is prohibited from violating the law.”

Elsewhere in discovery, Bazian was notably told by his lawyer to hold off from answering a question about whether he is acquainted with anyone who has been accused of membership in the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is an offshoot. Following a break in the proceedings, during which he conferred with his attorney, Bazian later revealed he knows a New Jersey imam linked to the Muslim Brotherhood but was only aware of a legal fight over his immigration status through “public information,” though he said they had met multiple times.

In a recent deposition of Jamal Said, the longtime leader of the Mosque Foundation outside Chicago who was listed as an unindicted conspirator in the HLF case and regularly speaks at AMP events, was also evasive about his own alleged connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, which he characterized as “moderate Islam.”

Asked whether he knows if AMP provides material support to Hamas, the sheikh — whose mosque has donated to the group — initially demurred. “I don’t know they are providing support to Hamas,” he told the Boims’ attorneys, but later added that he had no reason to investigate. In a separate remark, he said that AMP had told him “many times” that the group does not send money abroad, which he had deemed sufficient.

Beyond such mixed messaging, the depositions suggest AMP made misrepresentations in its early tax filings, inadvertently or not, while engaging in lobbying and other activities that may be forbidden by nonprofit organizations, potentially jeopardizing its tax-exempt status — a source of scrutiny in the Virginia attorney general’s newer investigation. For instance, Munjed Ahmad, a co-founder and national board member of AMP who has stirred controversy for delivering a lecture on how to skirt terror laws, admitted the group had introduced several “errors” and “mistakes” into its early tax returns, according to a deposition he took last February.

Meanwhile, the documents show that AMP has barely, if at all, fulfilled a description listed on its tax forms stating the group provides “funding for publishing books and journals,” with several of its members sharing contradictory statements on the matter. Bazian said AMP had published “booklets rather than books,” while Ahmad noted the group had donated copies of a controversial book on the Israel lobby to libraries. For his part, Sarsour, the AMP board member who spent time in an Israeli prison, said that the group had published “many books” covering a range of Palestinian issues.

Still, Lara Burns, a retired federal agent and now head of terrorism research at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, said AMP has otherwise been “very successful” in spreading what she called “propaganda” that has boosted Hamas in the U.S. — which she said has “gone unchecked” for years.   

***

As the case moves forward, Schlessinger said he is optimistic it could head to trial as soon as this year, nearly a decade after the suit was filed. “We would like the public and the press in general to hear what these witnesses have to say from a witness stand and make their own determination,” he told JI.

Gary Osen, an attorney with experience in terror financing cases whose law firm has filed an amicus brief supporting the Boims in their lawsuit, said in a recent interview with JI that the complaint paints “a very convincing picture” to establish that AMP is an alter ego of IAP — which he called a “fairly common problem” among groups with alleged ties to terror.

In the meantime, some challenges remain. Unlike related cases, for example, the Boims’ lawyers have already successfully obtained some of AMP’s donor records, even as they are designated as confidential, which Schlesinger said he plans to challenge in order to bring them to the public. But he has had trouble acquiring earlier records that could illustrate further parallels with IAP, the depositions suggest.

Last year, Hamayel, the former IAP leader who now manages AMP’s books and records, told the Boims’ counsel that he had maintained a list of the group’s donations on Excel spreadsheets until 2012 or 2013, after which the computer he was using to store such data crashed. He was unable to recover the missing information, he claimed, and said he did not recall holding onto the computer. Afterward, he said he began using a cloud-based service to store AMP’s donor records, according to his deposition, parts of which remain confidential.  

During the exchange, Hamayel’s attorney instructed him “not to answer as to any specifics,” when asked if he had turned over all available donor records as part of discovery.

In a statement to JI shared by Schlessinger, Joyce Boim voiced hope that the case would soon finally come to a close, as she prepares to observe the anniversary of her son’s death next month. “Dovid’s yahrzeit is in May, and it will be 29 years since I lost him,” she said. “The murderers are still killing people and torturing people and I don’t know when it’s going to end.”

If the Boims prevail in their case, Schlessinger acknowledges that recovering the full judgment from two decades ago is still unlikely, even as the group’s fundraising has increased considerably since Hamas’ terror attacks. The organization pulled in a record $2.3 million in revenue in 2023, according to its latest tax filings. 

“I don’t think there is any chance that we will collect $156 million from AMP, but we will get what we can,” Schlessinger said. “We’re not really in this for the money,” he clarified. “We’re in it to get some justice for the Boims.”

In a statement to JI shared by Schlessinger, Joyce Boim, who has lived in Israel with her husband for the past several decades, voiced hope that the case would soon finally come to a close, as she prepares to observe the anniversary of her son’s death next month. “Dovid’s yahrzeit is in May, and it will be 29 years since I lost him,” she said. “The murderers are still killing people and torturing people and I don’t know when it’s going to end.”

“I am not giving up,” she vowed last week. “We need to keep this mission in the limelight. It is essential that we keep fighting to see an end to this horror.”

Sens. Jim Risch (R-ID) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the chair and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, this week urged the Trump administration in a letter to consider expanded sanctions relief for Syria.

Their letter, addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, marked a notable new push from two of Congress’ most senior foreign policy leaders for targeted and conditional sanctions relief for the new Syrian government, an effort that has seen broad bipartisan support in Washington, but which is opposed by the Israeli government.

Risch and Shaheen urged the administration to “remove barriers to expanded engagement with the Syrian interim government,” with an aim of balancing “opportunity and risk” and providing opportunities for U.S. partners to engage in Syria even if the U.S. takes a more cautious approach.

“We recommend a thorough review of existing U.S. regulations on Syria, to include the extension and expansion of existing general licenses and limited or short-term sanctions relief in the near term,” the lawmakers said.

They urged the Cabinet officials to offer sanctions relief for a wide range of critical fields including agriculture, energy and energy infrastructure, finance, telecommunications and education. 

The two said the U.S. should expand general license provisions to allow “more time and geographic flexibility to those on the ground” and consider “short-term sanctions relief” to increase liquidity and prevent instability, goals they believed are  “essential to achieving the conditions to advance U.S. interests.”

Risch and Shaheen said that the U.S. should also work to push the new government to intensify efforts to crack down on terrorism, prevent Iranian and Russian entrenchment, destroy remaining chemical weapons, eliminate narcotics and find missing U.S. citizens.

The senators argued that the administration should reward “irreversible” progress on these issues with “fulsome sanctions relief,” and pursue “deeper economic and diplomatic isolation” if such progress does not materialize.

They warned that some recent reports out of Syria “raise serious concerns” about backsliding on some of these issues. 

Risch and Shaheen further noted the “growing competition between Israel and Türkiye over Syria’s trajectory that may threaten American interests,” urging the administration “to move quickly to mediate between our allies.”

Two of the leading Democratic hopefuls looking to replace retiring Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) condemned anti-Israel protesters for harassing University of Michigan Regent Sarah Hubbard over the weekend. 

Protesters could be heard in video of the incident, which began circulating on social media on Sunday evening, shouting at Hubbard that she had “blood on [her] hands” along with other insults as she was guided away by a uniformed police officer. “Your money has gone to kill Palestinian children. Your money has killed our families. We are your students, you answer to us,” one protester shouted as they filmed Hubbard. 

In response, Hubbard wrote on X that, “I remain steadfast in my commitment to make our campus a safe place for all our students and will not be intimidated by protestors.”

The incident prompted quick statements of condemnation from Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, two of the Democratic Senate candidates looking to replace Peters. Abdul El-Sayed, a Bernie Sanders-endorsed progressive candidate, did not issue a statement and did not respond to Jewish Insider’s request for comment.

“The harassment and antisemitism we’ve seen against University of Michigan regents in recent months is wrong, plain and simple. Regent Hubbard should be able to walk to her car without a police escort. And Regent [Jordan] Acker’s family was terrorized in their own home when vandals threw jars of urine through their windows and spray painted graffiti on their car,” McMorrow told JI in a statement. 

“The attacks and intimidation need to stop now,” McMorrow, who launched her campaign earlier this month, added.

A spokesperson for Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), who announced her candidacy on Tuesday, told JI in a statement, “Rep. Stevens has been clear that violence and vandalism have no place in our communities and will continue to make sure all Michiganders are safe in their daily lives.” 

Former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), who is also running to replace Peters, similarly denounced the harassment in a statement.

“These activists’ criminal actions toward university leaders at their homes cannot be tolerated. I stand with Sarah Hubbard and the Michigan Regents as they continue to stand up to hate and antisemitism in their efforts to make the campus safe for all students,” Rogers told JI.

Jewish Insider’s senior congressional correspondent Marc Rod contributed to this report.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee conveyed a message to the growing isolationist camp on the American right as he submitted his diplomatic credentials on Monday: Maintaining close relations with Israel and countering the Iranian nuclear threat are beneficial to Americans.

“The Iranian regime and all the hostility it has inflicted on the world for 46 years continues to threaten not only the peace of Israel but the peace of the United States,” Huckabee said in the ceremony at the residence of Israeli President Isaac Herzog. “Iranians have always said, ‘Death to Israel,’ and chapter two is ‘Death to America’… Israel is the appetizer, and the United States is the entree.”

“We care deeply about the threats that face Israel because those are also the threats that face our country,” he added.

In remarks Huckabee specifically directed at his “American colleagues,” he said that Israel and the U.S. “share the values of the Bible. We share the understanding that the Judeo-Christian foundation is the foundation of all of Western civilization. Without it, there is no sense of democracy, and love, appreciation and respect of the individuals.”

“It’s also important for Americans to know that, while we hope to be a good friend of Israel and provide assistance when we can, I never want Americans to think that we Americans are not greatly benefitted by our partnership with our ally Israel,” the ambassador stated. “We benefit dramatically in the sharing of intelligence, in the sharing of technology and in the sharing of agricultural innovation that Israel has led the world in creating.”

Huckabee’s remarks come amid the rise of the isolationist faction in the Republican Party and the Trump administration that has been pushing for a nuclear agreement with Iran and opposes a U.S.-backed Israeli strike on Iran. In addition, a growing number of right-wing podcasters have grown increasingly skeptical of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and in some cases spread anti-Israel conspiracy theories.

Much of the ambassador’s remarks were dedicated to his personal connection to Israel, which he first visited in 1973, when he was 17 years old. Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, Fox News host and Southern Baptist pastor, has since been to Israel dozens of times and led tens of thousands of people on trips to the country, he said.

“I still feel a sense of absolute joy and an overwhelming sense of awe that I am in a land that God himself said ‘this is mine and these are my people,’” Huckabee said. “I come to stand today with the State of Israel and the Jewish people because I believe it is not simply a geopolitical position, but a divine position.” 

Huckabee joked that he will reside in Israel for the next few years, “unless the president tweets something early in the morning and tells me to come home.” 

The ambassador said that philanthropist and GOP donor Dr. Miriam Adelson suggested he be appointed to the job, but that he never spoke to Trump about it, until he “got a call out of the clear blue just a few days after the election.” Trump did not ask Huckabee if he wanted the job; Huckabee recounted. “[The president said,] ‘Mike, you’re going to be my ambassador to Israel.’” Huckabee said that when he responded to the president-elect’s statement, he wasn’t just saying yes to a job but “to a calling from God himself.” 

Huckabee recounted that earlier this month, “the president handed [him] a handwritten note with a prayer for the peace of Jerusalem.” His first act as ambassador was to put the note in the Western Wall on Friday, “on behalf of the American people, with a reminder that we stand with you, we stand with the people of Israel.” 

The ambassador expressed hope that in the coming years, he will “see times when…that young Israeli mother puts her babies to bed at night and does not fear that some harm will come upon them as they sleep, but they will rest with peace, and they will continue to live with the extraordinary resilience of the Israeli people, which I’ve come to admire, as second to none.”

He also said he prays for the return of all the hostages from Gaza. 

Herzog commended Huckabee for being “a leading voice of moral clarity and conscience” and his appointment “a shining reflection of the president’s love, friendship and support for the State of Israel.” 

Huckabee was one of several ambassadors to hand their credentials to Herzog on Monday. Such ceremonies are usually brief, with few guests and almost no media coverage, but the new American ambassador attracted a crowd.

Among the attendees were Yael Eckstein, the president of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, and Adelson, who wore a dress she had specially designed for the dedication of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem in 2018, which is emblazoned with the Hebrew words, “If I forget thee, Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its cunning.”  

Israeli President Isaac Herzog called Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro on Sunday, a week after an arsonist motivated by anti-Israel animus set the governor’s mansion on fire. 

Herzog expressed solidarity with Shapiro after the attack, which took place hours after the governor hosted a Passover Seder. 

Shapiro told Herzog he greatly appreciated the call, a spokesperson for the president told Jewish Insider.

The man who set fire to the governor’s mansion last weekend said in a 911 call that he “will not take part in [Shapiro’s] plans for what he wants to do to the Palestinian people.” 

While Shapiro quoted the Jewish priestly blessing following the attack, he stopped short of attributing the attack to antisemitism in an interview on Friday with ABC News and rebuffed a call by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to have Attorney General Pam Bondi investigate the attack as a hate crime.

Herzog was the first Israeli official to call Shapiro after the attack. 

Ofir Akunis, the Israeli consul general in New York, sent a letter to Shapiro last week, saying that he was “deeply shocked and saddened to learn of the arson attack.”

“This appalling act of violence, carried out during one of the most meaningful nights of the Jewish calendar, could have resulted in a far greater tragedy,” Akunis added. “We commend law enforcement for their swift and effective response, and we stand in full solidarity with you and your family.”

Pro-Israel Democrats are pressing Republicans to disavow the Heritage Foundation’s report calling for the U.S. to phase out U.S. military aid to Israel over the next 20 years, arguing that a failure to do so would undermine their claims of supporting Israel.

“I’ll always oppose anti-Israel proposals, whether they come from the left or the right,” Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) said on X. “I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in denouncing this plan from their side of the aisle to fully cut off U.S. support for Israel, one of our closest allies.”

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said in a statement that “everyone — no matter their party — who claims to be a friend of Israel and the Jewish community needs to reject this report in the strongest possible terms.”

He said the report’s recommendations would undermine Israel and the United States, and that its very existence emboldens Iran and its terrorist proxies.

“Ensuring Israel’s security, and our own, is not a political issue,” Hoyer continued. “We must not let Heritage and the far right turn it into one.”

Robert Greenway, the director of the Allison Center for national security at Heritage, responded to Hoyer, saying “Your concerns are as gravely misplaced as your mischaracterization of our proposal,” and blasted recent Democratic presidents for having “throttled aid to Israel while appeasing our common enemies.”

Victoria Coates, the vice president of Heritage, added, “The only time a congressional Democrat will express support for Israel is when they think they can take a shot at Heritage.”

In a statement, Democratic Majority For Israel argued that the Heritage Foundation’s stature and influence in the conservative movement makes the proposal a serious concern for the pro-Israel community. 

It noted that the think tank was responsible for the Project 2025 plan laying out an agenda for a Republican presidential term, which DMFI accused the Trump administration of implementing.

““The Heritage Foundation occupies a unique space in Washington, D.C., which is why this proposal must be taken seriously,” the organization’s CEO Mark Mellman said. “As the authors of Project 2025, which the Trump Administration has swiftly implemented, the Heritage Foundation is a leading right-wing think tank that sets the agenda for Republican elected officials and policymakers. The proposal should not only be rejected outright, but it must also be strongly condemned by Republicans and Democrats alike who are committed to a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.”

It also tied the proposal to “a dangerous trend: the lure of isolationism.”

“The U.S.-Israel relationship is stronger than any single partisan initiative, and it is essential that we continue to support and strengthen this alliance for the benefit of both nations,” DMFI continued.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to appoint Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer — his elusive close political confidante and advisor — as the head of Israel’s hostage negotiations team touched off a political controversy in the country that underscores why Netanyahu selected him for the role.

By putting Dermer at the helm of the sensitive talks, Netanyahu ensured the negotiations are led by someone he trusts to align the Israeli team with the prime minister’s position: that the war against Hamas in Gaza cannot end unless his definition of “total victory” is achieved and the terror group is removed from power. The prime minister also hopes to plug the incessant leaks that have plagued the process. 

Dermer’s new position was leaked to the press earlier this month when Netanyahu was in Washington, but it became official last week. Dermer entered the negotiations as the first phase of the cease-fire and hostage-release deal was winding down, with the clock ticking to secure an agreement on phase two. Dermer arrived in Washington days later for meetings with President Donald Trump’s Mideast envoy, Steve Witkoff. 

A source with knowledge of the issue, who was granted anonymity to discuss the delicate situation, said that Netanyahu appointed a new lead negotiator “because this is a different negotiation with a new president of the U.S. The Biden deal is no longer valid. [The Trump administration] is backing Israel on everything, and I think that puts things in a different position. The Biden administration wasn’t backing us; they wanted a cease-fire. They didn’t care if Hamas remained in Gaza.”

Phase two of the cease-fire would involve ending the war, something that the government of Israel does not want to do because — as seen in the macabre displays of the handover of hostages —  Hamas has not been eliminated as a governing or military force, even as it has been significantly weakened.

Israel would prefer to extend phase one, exchanging dozens of Palestinian terrorists and security prisoners for each hostage. Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar told Jewish Insider last Thursday, “Theoretically, it’s within the framework [of phase one]. This option exists.” He estimated that there are 21 living hostages in Gaza, though there are 24 hostages who have not officially been declared dead.

A source familiar with the view in the Prime Minister’s Office told JI this week that the members of the previous team “were terrible negotiators, just terrible. They didn’t get the idea you’re supposed to bargain, not ‘whatever you want, whatever conditions’ [to bring back the hostages]. Now, you don’t have any leaks — everything was leaking before. It’s like [the previous team] were on a different side or something.”

One challenge Dermer will face in the negotiations will be convincing Hamas to continue those lopsided trades without the promise of Israel ending the war. Hamas views the hostages as the terror group’s best leverage to get what it wants: Hamas’ survival and a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

***

Mossad chief David Barnea led the talks before Netanyahu replaced him with Dermer. Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar and IDF representative Maj.-Gen. Nitzan Alon were also on the team, and Netanyahu repeatedly sent with them his diplomatic advisor, Ophir Falk, to the talks in Cairo and Doha, Qatar. 

The security chiefs often disagreed with Netanyahu about how the negotiations were handled, and there were frequent leaks to Israeli media from the previous team portraying the prime minister as obstructive. 

“A senior source familiar with the details” of the negotiation sent a statement to reporters last week indicating that this was Netanyahu’s reason for replacing them with Dermer. The source said that “the achievement of the agreement to release six of our living hostages at one time” last Saturday — as opposed to the three originally planned — “is the result of the prime minister’s decision to change the makeup of the negotiating team. The new team changed the dynamic and led negotiations instead of concessions. It also stopped the practice of regular and biased briefings against the prime minister and the political echelon that only caused Hamas to entrench its position and add demands.”

Anonymous security officials pushed back in Hebrew media, calling the claim “a disgrace” and arguing that the sped-up hostage release was an option previously written into the deal. Yair Lapid, the opposition leader, and National Unity party leader Benny Gantz railed against Netanyahu for undermining the defense establishment. 

Labor MK Merav Michaeli, a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said that “obviously [Dermer is] the go-to person as far as Bibi is concerned, and he is extremely well-connected in the [Trump] administration, so by all means, appoint a capable person who is well-connected and can get stuff done. But why does this have to include removing the professionals who are the ones with all the mileage, experience and knowledge?”

The Hostages and Missing Families Forum called on everyone sparring publicly to “stop this behavior immediately” and focus on the fate of the hostages.

The source familiar with the view in the Prime Minister’s Office told JI this week that the members of the previous team “were terrible negotiators, just terrible. They didn’t get the idea you’re supposed to bargain, not ‘whatever you want, whatever conditions’ [to bring back the hostages].” 

“Now, you don’t have any leaks — everything was leaking before. It’s like [the previous team] were on a different side or something,” the source added.

Labor MK Merav Michaeli, a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said that “obviously [Dermer is] the go-to person as far as Bibi is concerned, and he is extremely well-connected in the [Trump] administration, so by all means, appoint a capable person who is well-connected and can get stuff done.”

“But why does this have to include removing the professionals who are the ones with all the mileage, experience and knowledge?” Michaeli asked. 

Michaeli also pointed out that “the negotiation is not with the Americans, it’s with Hamas, Egypt and so forth, and theirs is a language Dermer doesn’t speak … Why throw out the people who know how to talk with the Arab side — Bar and Barnea?” 

“The inevitable conclusion is that Netanyahu’s aim is not to bring back hostages … It is to remain prime minister, whether from reigniting the war in Gaza or another way,” she said.

***

Dermer, the former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., played a role in advancing hostage deals even before he led the negotiations. He was instrumental in convincing the Cabinet to accept the first cease-fire in November 2023, in which over 100 hostages were freed. 

Shortly after Trump was reelected, he told Israeli President Isaac Herzog in a call that he thought nearly all of the hostages were dead, and Herzog told him he was mistaken. Dermer visited Trump in Mar-a-Lago days later to share Israeli intelligence that most of the hostages were alive, JI has learned. 

“This is the highest moral imperative: to rescue them from the tunnels of hell,” Mossad chief David Barnea told the Institute for National Security Studies’ Annual Conference. “There is no greater feeling — not even when carrying out a highly impactful operation — than the sense of duty and purpose in bringing the hostages home.”

At the same time, Dermer has a proven record of loyalty to Netanyahu in the face of public pressure regarding the hostages. Protesters stand outside Dermer’s house regularly — in a group chat viewed by JI, they talked about having followed him to synagogue and the gym — but it has not swayed him from being Netanyahu’s loyal soldier. 

In a heated security cabinet meeting in August, from which there were extensive leaks to the media, Dermer took Netanyahu’s side against the security establishment that sought further concessions to reach a hostage deal. Netanyahu wanted the ministers to vote that the IDF’s continued presence along the Philadelphi Corridor between Gaza and Egypt must be a condition of a hostage deal. IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi and Mossad head Barnea argued that it was unnecessary. Then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly shouted: “You are voting that if we decide that there are two options — either stay in Philadelphi or bring back hostages — you are deciding to stay in Philadelphi. Does that seem reasonable to you? There are people alive there!” 

Dermer reportedly responded: “The prime minister can do what he wants.”  

Barnea continued to push back against Netanyahu’s approach after being replaced as chief negotiator, telling the Institute for National Security Studies’ Annual Conference on Tuesday that returning the hostages has been his “foremost mission since Oct. 7.”

“This is the highest moral imperative: to rescue them from the tunnels of hell,” Barnea said. “There is no greater feeling — not even when carrying out a highly impactful operation — than the sense of duty and purpose in bringing the hostages home.”

Commenting on Barnea’s remarks, Michaeli said: “You understand his priorities and the prime minister’s are not aligned. The person brought to be in charge of the negotiations is the one implementing Netanyahu’s priorities.”

***

Trust is also key in Netanyahu’s choice of Dermer to lead the negotiations. Netanyahu has gone through dozens of advisors in his four decades in politics, and many have left only to speak out against him and, in some high-profile cases, run against him in elections.

Dermer, however, has been advising Netanyahu since 1999. He has, over the years, been called “Bibi’s brain,” and “the son Netanyahu wishes he had” (Netanyahu has two sons, Yair and Avner, as well as a daughter, Noa, from a previous marriage).

Netanyahu’s deep trust in Dermer is partly because he has proven less susceptible to public pressure than others in similar positions. Dermer shies away from the media and the public, has never run for office, and even now, when he is a Cabinet minister, operates like Netanyahu’s top advisor and envoy.

In a segment titled “Who are you, Ron Dermer?” on Israel’s most-watched news program last November, former Netanyahu Chief of Staff Ari Harow said that “one of the unique things about Ron is he never had his own political aspirations. He isn’t looking for promotions or titles. He’s not looking for a place in politics for himself; he is looking to help the State of Israel.”

Dermer gives even fewer interviews than Netanyahu, and only to foreign media. The most recent Hebrew interview Channel 12 could find for the segment about Dermer was from 2010.

As such, the minister is unknown to most Israelis. At the beginning of the segment, journalists walked around Jerusalem’s Machane Yehuda market with photos of Dermer and asked shoppers to identify him. Only two could — and they had accents from English-speaking countries. A recent sketch on “Eretz Nehederet,” Israel’s version of “Saturday Night Live,” featured the show’s first-ever impression of Dermer in honor of his appointment as the top hostage negotiator. The thrust of the sketch was his lack of communication with the Israeli public. The way they portrayed him — as somewhat of a frat boy and a sycophant to Netanyahu’s wife, Sara, and son, Yair Netanyahu, of whom he is known to steer clear — betrayed the writers’ unfamiliarity most of all.

Dermer has given one speech in the Knesset plenum, a rare occasion in which lawmakers availed themselves of the legislature’s tools to require him to appear before them. He has limited his submission to parliamentary oversight to the Knesset’s confidential Subcommittee on Intelligence. 

Steve Witkoff, the White House envoy who has led Gaza hostage-release and cease-fire talks for the U.S., said Tuesday evening that talks for phase two of the deal between Israel and Hamas remain in flux but that he’s hoping for progress by the weekend.

Witkoff also suggested, speaking at an American Jewish Committee event, that Lebanon and Syria could come to normalize relations with Israel.

On the hostage-release talks, Witkoff said that he’s “not entirely sure yet” how Israel and Hamas will get to phase two of the deal, “but we are working, we’re making a lot of progress.” If enough progress materializes in the next few days, Witkoff said he’ll travel to the region on Sunday to help finalize a deal.

“People are responsive,” Witkoff said. “Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. It’s a very chaotic place, the Middle East.”

He said that his and the White House’s top goal is to return all of the hostages.

Witkoff was initially set to travel to the Middle East on Wednesday, but his plans were delayed by Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelensky’s visit to the United States, slated for the end of the week. Witkoff, a close friend of the president, has also become a key negotiator with Russia.

In the longer term, Witkoff suggested that Lebanon and Syria could join the Abraham Accords, the regional peace agreements between Israel and Arab states, without providing further details.

He criticized President Joe Biden’s May 2024 proposal for Gaza — which undergirds the cease-fire deal — because it assumed that reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Strip was feasible under a five-year timeline. Witkoff, who noted that he was the first American official to visit the territory in years, said that a 15- to 25-year timeline would be much more realistic.

“It’s a giant slum … it’s a slum that’s been decimated,” Witkoff said. “It is completely destroyed.”

He said that U.S. partners including Jordan and Egypt — both of which Trump has proposed as countries to relocate the population of Gaza to — are “dug in” and “focused on solutions,” actively engaging with the United States.

Regarding Trump’s proposal to remove the Palestinian population from Gaza, Witkoff said that “it’s not an eviction plan, it’s about creating an environment that — whoever should live there — is better than it’s ever been in the last 40 years.” He said that the Trump administration is not seeking to create a mass Palestinian diaspora, which he said would only drive further radicalization.

Witkoff said that Trump’s proposal was focused on “directionally chang[ing] what people are thinking there, how they’re going to live together.”

Trump, Witkoff continued, is not focused on reaching a two-state solution, but instead on “how you get to a better life” for Palestinians, including changing the Palestinian education system and providing better career and quality of life prospects for the Palestinians.

He suggested that the people in Gaza are not interested in waiting 20 years to reestablish normal lives. “Maybe we should be talking about the ability to come back later on, but right here, right now, Gaza is a long-term redevelopment plan.”

He further suggested that the five-year timeline laid out by Biden had hampered progress toward Saudi-Israel normalization, but that normalization efforts can resume once a Gaza redevelopment plan has been more fully articulated.

Witkoff predicted that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states would ultimately embrace peace with Israel because the ongoing risks of war and regional instability make it difficult to finance major projects — “the underwriting risk on war is just too high.”

He said he expects that Saudi Arabia and others in the region will put forward development plans in line with the Trump administration’s proposal once they accept that Gaza cannot be rebuilt in the short term. 

He said many countries are stepping up to volunteer to be part of the “permanent solution for the Gazan people” and that the U.S. soon plans to hold a summit with top regional developers to discuss Gaza.

“I think when people see some of the ideas that come from this, they’re going to be amazed,” Witkoff said.

The former real estate developer also said that the Biden administration was largely responsible for the amount of unexploded ordinance left in Gaza, which will make redevelopment more difficult, alleging that the Biden administration’s withholding of some arms from Israel had forced Israel to use old and ultimately non-functional ammunition.

He added that the tunnels under Gaza present a further challenge both in terms of the destruction in the territory and rebuilding it.

To facilitate peace in the Middle East, the U.S. needs to ensure stability in partner countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia and address discontent in their populaces, “but all in all, there are some really good things that are happening,” Witkoff said.

Witkoff praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that the Israeli government had taken numerous positive steps prior to Trump taking office, including decimating Hamas, degrading Hezbollah and eliminating its leadership and attacking Iran’s air defenses.

He repeatedly made reference to a film of Hamas’ atrocities on Oct. 7, describing the group as “barbarians” and emphasizing that the Trump administration agrees that Hamas cannot control post-war Gaza.

Yair Lapid, the Israeli opposition leader and former prime minister, laid out a plan on Tuesday for Egypt to take temporary control of Gaza for eight to 15 years after the war in Gaza, in cooperation with various other regional powers, in exchange for international relief of its foreign debt obligations.

Under the plan, after the end of the three-phase cease-fire and hostage-release deal between Hamas and Israel, Egypt, backed by a United Nations Security Council resolution with some partnership from the Gulf and others in the international community, would take “temporary guardianship” of Gaza, Lapid said in an event at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Lapid said that, based on the completion of “measurable benchmarks” in anti-corruption and deradicalization, Egypt would turn over control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority at the end of its guardianship period, in coordination with Israel and the United States. 

Lapid said that there’s precedent in the 1960s for such an arrangement, with support from the Arab League. He said that Saudi Arabia and the Abraham Accords states, as well as the U.S., would be part of the deal, with the U.S. and others making investments in reconstruction — a provision that Lapid claimed was consistent with President Donald Trump’s vision for Gaza.

“On the security side, Israel and Egypt have a deep and lasting strategic relationship supported by the United States. Egypt has an interest in the stability of Gaza and the region as a whole,” Lapid said. “Egypt wants to remove the idea of a population transfer from Gaza to Egypt.”

In exchange, the international community would pay off Egypt’s mounting international debts, both incentivizing Egypt to participate in the plan and stabilizing the Egyptian government.

“We can take these two problems and combine them into one solution,” Lapid said.

Any Palestinians who have somewhere else to move to would be allowed to do so, he continued.

Lapid framed his “Egyptian Solution” as having the effect of also solving long-running concerns from Israel and others in the region about the stability of the Egyptian government, a critical ally to Israel. Lapid warned that the fall of the Egyptian government could set off a chain reaction around the Middle East.

He suggested that it would also be in Egypt’s own security interests to deal with the potential threat from Gaza, as well as avert the possibility of forced mass population transfer from Gaza into Egypt.

While acknowledging that Egypt has not been a perfect partner to Israel, the opposition leader said it has a long-running relationship with Israel, is reasonably trustworthy and has worked with Israel on security issues before, making it the best option available.

“We know how to work together very well,” Lapid said. “Between bad dilemmas, this is the best option.”

Under the plan, Egypt would be responsible for leading the deradicalization and demilitarization of Gaza, including preventing arms smuggling to Hamas and destroying the terrorist group’s expansive network of tunnels under Gaza.

While he did not offer many specifics on what the security force in Gaza would look like, he said it would involve Egypt and a pan-Arab force, while allowing Israel to intervene militarily when necessary.

“We’re going to trust you but we’re not going to trust anyone if we’re going to see another bunch of guys with Toyota trucks and machine guns coming towards our border,” Lapid said. “It’s going to be a joint effort that will take a lot of time … It’s going to be a long process and a painful one, and the use of force part of it.”

Outside of Gaza, Lapid said that Israel and the international community need to go after Iran’s oil production to ensure that Iran cannot rearm and resupply Hamas, and ultimately precipitate the fall of the regime in Tehran.

Lapid, who sounded largely in lockstep with the current Israeli government on some key issues a day earlier in a speech to an AIPAC conference, criticized the Israeli government at FDD for failing to present a realistic alternative to Hamas or the Palestinian Authority in Gaza for effective governance, noting that Gulf states have refused to enter Gaza without cooperation from the PA.

“I supported it, I still do, but the use of force is not the goal,” Lapid said. “It is a tool to change reality. We need to get to a point where Gaza stops being a security threat to Israel and where it also stops being a hotbed of poverty, extremism and religious hatred.”

He dismissed suggestions that Israel should annex Gaza or the West Bank permanently as a “messianic” vision detached from reality and Israel’s own interests.

Asked during a Q&A session by FDD CEO Mark Dubowitz what deradicalization means and whether it would be realistic, Lapid pointed to educational curricula on tolerance promoted by the United Arab Emirates and emphasized the need to reform Palestinian textbooks. He also highlighted the need to address corruption in the PA.

He reiterated that he believes it’s in Israel’s interest to find a way to “divorce” from the Palestinians — which he said will not make the Israeli-Palestinian conflict go away permanently — but that the “burden of proof” will be on the Palestinians to demonstrate that they’re changing.

The former Israeli prime minister said that finding a viable path forward in Gaza is also a necessary precondition for Israel’s key challenge of building and reinforcing a regional coalition to oppose Iran, of which Saudi Arabia would be a key partner.

Lapid said he hasn’t discussed the plan with Egypt at this point, though he said he has talked about it with allies throughout the Middle East and the Gulf, and presumes that Egypt is aware of the proposal through such conversations.

“I’m estimating they’re going to say no and then yes,” Lapid said. “They understand this as the beginning of some sort of a negotiation towards a solution.”

Pressed during the Q&A by Middle East Institute senior fellow Brian Katulis on the clear inconsistencies between the Lapid plan and Trump’s proposal — which includes not just U.S. investment but direct U.S. control of Gaza and the forced permanent relocation of the Palestinian population — Dubowitz framed the Lapid plan as a potentially more feasible version of Trump’s proposal, taking it from an “11” and dialing it down to “a seven or eight, for a realistic plan.”

The Israeli government has offered to send aid to California to assist with the response to the wildfires in the Los Angeles area, which have destroyed thousands of homes and killed at least two dozen people, and said it would pay all expenses associated with that assistance, according to a letter obtained by Jewish Insider.

“In light of the deep, long-standing friendship and alliance between our nations, which in recent years has proved itself stronger than ever, we would like to extend our support and help our friends in their time of need,” Raful Engel, the director general of the Israeli Ministry of Public Security said in a letter to California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The Israeli official offered to send a delegation of “expert firefighters who specialize in fire and rescue operations to help combat these fires and share their experience in order to minimize the damage inflicted on property and more importantly on human lives.”

Newsom’s director of communications, Izzy Gardon, said in a statement, “We’re grateful to Israel and many other nations in offering their support to California. Emergency Officials are currently working with our international partners on planning and mobilization.”

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who represents the area affected by the Pacific Palisades fire, explained that U.S. jurisdictions have existing mutual aid agreements with various countries and other jurisdictions for such emergencies. He said that Israel’s offer to pay all expenses associated with its offered aid is a step above and beyond what those agreements usually entail.

“Israel has offered us help that I very much appreciate, and now they’ve gone one step further and said that they would absorb the entire cost,” Sherman said. “Obviously this fire has lots of moving parts, but Israel has gone even beyond Canada and Mexico and our closest friends in terms of not only wanting to help, but not wanting to be reimbursed for it.”

Sherman added that he believes the Israeli firefighters would be able to bring “skills that I think we need,” and said he’d personally raised the offer with Newsom. 

Sherman said the California government has so far accepted assistance offers from Mexico and Canada, partners it has worked most closely with in the past.

Fire crews from surrounding states are also assisting the response in California.

Lt. Col. Shay Levy, head of the Research and Wildfire Branch at The Israeli National Fire and Rescue Authority, told JI on Wednesday that a delegation of expert firefighters in fire and rescue operations was set to leave for California on Wednesday night to assist the forces there. “We will be glad to help with anything we can, we see great importance in helping to save lives and advance fire safety,” Levy said.

The Israeli NGO SmartAid also said it would dispatch resources to help with the fire response. In addition, IsraAid is offering support, and plans to send personnel to assist.

Sherman described Israel’s offer as particularly generous in the context of the ongoing Houthi attacks, the response to which might require similar resources.

And he said that Israel’s willingness to offer these resources reflects confidence in its security situation and the diminished threat it faces from Hezbollah compared to the pre-Oct. 7 period.

Some anti-Israel activists in the U.S. and the Iranian state-owned outlet Press TV have sought to connect the fires to the war in Gaza, claiming that U.S. aid for Israel is depriving resources from the emergency response, or even that the war is contributing to global warming through increased carbon emissions.

JI Israel Editor Tamara Zieve contributed to this report.

Israeli MK Nir Barkat, a member of the Likud party with aspirations for party leadership, referred to Israel’s new coalition government as an ineffectual “interim government” in an interview with Jewish Insider on Tuesday.

“They have no vision. They have no ideology. They have a mutual veto between the left and the right,” Barkat, the former mayor of Jerusalem, said of the new Naftali Bennett-led government. “And they agree to only do things that are not controversial. Therefore they can’t really make any bold moves. They start legislation and never finish a lot of it,” Barkat explained. “Nobody expects anything from them.”

Barkat predicted that Likud will “return [to lead the government] probably quicker than people think.”

The former Jerusalem mayor spoke to JI while visiting Capitol Hill on Tuesday to push back on Biden administration efforts to reopen the shuttered East Jerusalem consulate, which previously functioned as a hub for U.S.-Palestinian relations.

Barkat met with eight lawmakers — split between parties — on Monday and Tuesday to discuss what he said was Israeli opposition to the consulate. He would not name the legislators with whom he met. Israeli opponents argue that a consulate serving Palestinians in Jerusalem would undermine the goal of a united Jerusalem as the undisputed capital of Israel.

“I’ve been conveying my views and the understanding of the Israeli public — 75% of the public in Israel does not support such a move,” Barkat said, citing a poll that showed that 72% of Israelis oppose a U.S. consulate in Jerusalem for Palestinians.

U.S. lawmakers “understand that this is something that the Israeli public is strongly against” he added. “It’s a move you don’t want to make without thinking. And they understand that this is a process that America respects, as a democracy.”

Barkat did not meet with any of the nine Democratic senators who wrote a letter to President Joe Biden in support of reopening the consulate.

Barkat emphasized that no new diplomatic missions to the Palestinians have been opened in Jerusalem since Israel achieved statehood — although several nations have preexisting Palestinian missions in the city that predate 1948. Former President Donald Trump shuttered the consulate in 2019 after moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Barkat worries that reopening the consulate would spark a wave of attempts by European countries to open similar missions in Jerusalem. The MK added that the U.S. and other nations should open diplomatic missions inside the Palestinian territories, such as in Ramallah, if they want to serve the Palestinians.

Barkat said he emphasized to U.S. lawmakers that “this is not a time for a partisan move against the Israeli public opinion.”

“I think we need to focus on bipartisan issues, and shy away from [a] partisan one-sided move,” Barkat said.

The MK said he further argued that the new Israeli government would be unlikely to support the consulate move, as right-wing members in Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s ruling coalition would be unlikely to vote in favor.

“Many people understand that this is something that could dramatically shake the new government and risk the new government because the right-wingers of the government are going to be in a very bad situation… if they have to give consent to the American request, and I believe that they will not give consent,” Barkat said.

In addition to his diplomatic efforts in the U.S., Barkat is pursuing legislation in the Knesset to block any foreign government from opening a mission to the Palestinians in Jerusalem.

“It’s similar to if there’s a lawsuit against something, you just wait for the courts to decide. You don’t want to sneak a decision knowing that there’s a legal procedure… happening in Israel,” Barkat said.

Barkat, a member of the Likud party which is now in the minority in the Knesset for the first time in over a decade, delivered a pessimistic report on the new government’s first weeks in office.

“We realize that sometimes sitting in the opposition sharpens your thinking. We work as a group,” he said. “We were able to derail a number of government decisions that could not pass in the parliament without a majority.”

Looking to the future, Barkat made clear his aspirations to lead Likud, but said he doesn’t plan to challenge longtime party leader and former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directly.

“When Netanyahu… [decides] to resign, I will be there to compete for the leading role in Likud,” Barkat said. “We are a democracy, and Netanyahu was elected to be the head of the party, and I respect that.”

Barkat indicated he would not have handled the recent conflicts in Jerusalem — over issues like evictions and access to the Temple Mount — differently than the city’s current mayor, emphasizing that the evictions are the purview of Jerusalem’s court system, meaning politics “are totally irrelevant.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke with Israel’s new foreign minister, Yair Lapid, in a phone conversation on Thursday afternoon that touched on strengthening Israel’s relationship with Democrats, according to Schumer’s press secretary.

During a short break off the Senate floor, Schumer called Lapid, the leader of Israel’s Yesh Atid Party, to congratulate him on successfully forming a new unity government earlier this month. 

If the ideologically diverse coalition, which ousted former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after 12 years in power, holds, Lapid will take over as prime minister in two years in accordance with a dual power-sharing agreement with Naftali Bennett, the current prime minister and leader of Israel’s Yamina Party.

The Senate majority leader said he looked forward to strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship and told Lapid that he appreciated the foreign minister’s public comments about bolstering Israel’s rapport with Democrats following recent violence between Israel and Hamas that has divided Democrats in the House and Senate, according to the press secretary, Angelo Roefaro.

Schumer and Lapid also spoke about the importance of bipartisan support for Israel among Democrats and Republicans.

The call comes on the heels of a recent conversation between Lapid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who, in a phone conversation on Tuesday, also discussed continuing a bipartisan consensus on Israel.

Secretary of State Tony Blinken is scheduled to meet with Lapid in Rome on Sunday.

An upcoming congressional delegation to Israel will be an opportunity for legislators to “be focused on support for Israel and its security and at the same time focused on the humanitarian concerns of the Palestinians,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Gregory Meeks (D-NY), who is leading the delegation, told Jewish Insider on Wednesday.

The trip to Israel and the Palestinian territories will be Meeks’s first as chairman.

Meeks, who took over the committee in January, replacing pro-Israel stalwart former Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), cited last month’s war in Gaza, the Abraham Accords and the new Israeli government as having shaped his decision to prioritize traveling to Israel.

“To have an opportunity to sit down with this new government in Israel and bring together a bipartisan delegation from the United States Congress, where we can be focused on support for Israel and its security and at the same time focused on the humanitarian concerns of the Palestinians, it seems to me to be the right time and the right message to get that done,” Meeks said. “I just think that it’s really important to do.”

The group is also planning to meet with Palestinian leadership. Meeks, who represents parts of Queens and Brooklyn, said multiple committee members had already joined the trip, which is set to depart sometime in July, but did not name any of the legislators who had already signed onto the delegation, deferring to the members themselves.

“We have a lot of members who want to go, so that’s not an issue,” he added.

No committee members contacted by JI have confirmed participation so far.

Meeks said he hopes to hear how the U.S. can help keep Israel safe and address Palestinians’ humanitarian concerns.

“We’ve got to try to figure out how to move forward with a two-state solution,” Meeks said, adding that he sees the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, as “a window of strong opportunity to have change.”

Two prominent critics of Israel’s policies during the recent conflict — Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Joaquín Castro (D-TX) — are members of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Meeks said he hopes that representatives who oppose some of Israel’s positions will join the delegation. 

“Hopefully we’re going to have a cross-section of members from all different viewpoints. I think that’s what’s good about our committee,” he said. “That’s what we’re going to be looking to travel with so that everybody can get information and ask questions.”

The Abraham Accords marked a major shift in Middle East diplomacy and provided a new opportunity for technology, security and cultural exchanges across the region. But a little-noticed side effect of the normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab nations — its potential consequences for the energy industry and the world’s climate — is now coming into sharper view.

Victoria Coates, a former Trump administration official and an architect of the normalization agreements between Israel and the Arab countries, argues that the deals would not have been possible had Israel not begun commercial production of natural gas in 2019. 

“It’s my position that the Abraham Accords, absent the shift in Israel’s energy posture, would not have occurred,” Coates, who served as special advisor to Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette in the Trump administration, told Jewish Insider. Seizing on that insight, she joined the advisory board of the Council for a Secure America (CSA), a nonprofit originally founded in the 1980s to build ties between the American energy industry and the pro-Israel community, to rewrite its mission to focus exclusively on furthering the goal of the Abraham Accords within the energy industry. According to the new mission statement, which was unveiled last week, CSA will work to connect people working in the oil and gas industry in the U.S. with counterparts in Israel and Gulf nations, and to make American professionals aware of the benefits of working with Israel. 

The move underscores the degree to which the diplomatic agreements have also opened the door to lucrative business opportunities for energy companies both in the U.S. and Gulf countries.  

Last year Chevron acquired Noble Energy, a Houston-based company that has been a top investor in the Israeli energy sector. “What the Chevron deal meant was that U.S. energy [companies] were no longer afraid of going into Israel. Historically, they had been terrified, because the fear was, [if] you go into Israel the Gulf was going to freeze you out in some kind of boycott,” Coates explained. With the largest American energy company now invested in Israeli natural gas, the landscape changed for Gulf nations as well, Coates argued. “I think it will make Israel a very attractive partner to a lot of our Gulf allies,” she said.

CSA’s new mission comes as alternative forms of energy have gained traction in recent years, particularly in the wake of climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The organization worried about staying relevant as political winds shifted against the core of its mission.

“There is a major, major, major movement away from fossil fuel towards alternative fuels,” said Fred Zeidman, the co-chair of CSA’s board and a longtime oil industry executive and Republican activist. “We decided we had to come up with some way to expand the agenda of the Council for a Secure America. What we could not do was to forsake fossil fuel, because that was 100% of our whole mission.” Cooperating with Gulf nations was an easy choice; energy is those countries’ primary source of revenue. 

The organization has a diverse array of supporters — former Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) is on CSA’s advisory board and it was, in part, founded by Malcolm Hoenlein, the vice chair of the nonpartisan Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. As a nonprofit, CSA is also nonpartisan. “I’ve been very encouraged by everything the new administration has said, about their ongoing support for the Abraham Accords,” said Coates. “It’s vitally important that it be bipartisan.”

CSA joins the small but growing industry of think tanks and other nongovernmental organizations looking to further the work of the Abraham Accords. CSA plans to work with the Abraham Accords Institute for Peace, a nonprofit founded earlier this year by former senior Trump administration officials Jared Kushner, Avi Berkowitz andRob Greenway to increase trade and tourism between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan — the countries that signed onto the agreements.

“We want to be in a place where if any of our folks [in the oil industry] say, ‘Hey, look, I really got something I want to sell into Dubai or into Oman,’ that we can connect them either directly or with Rob [Greenway] and Victoria [Coates],” said Zeidman. 

The organization also aims to bolster America’s credibility within the energy industry. “For us as an American institution, to be able to connect with both Israel and with the Gulf and with Eastern Mediterranean countries that are interested in these things and coordinate, it amplifies our role in that global market for fossil fuels,” noted Coates. 

CSA does not intend to only engage with the countries that were part of last year’s Abraham Accords. Coates pointed to Egypt, which has had a diplomatic agreement with Israel for more than 40 years but has only recently seen economic cooperation increase, as exemplified by the Egyptian energy minister’s recent visit to Israel. She also wants CSA to help move the Abraham Accords forward: “I would be very hopeful that Saudi Arabia would see it the same way,” she said.

After the recent round of intense fighting between Israel and Hamas, several Republican politicians have visited Israel or announced plans to do so. One of the first to announce travel plans was Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb, who arrived in Israel days after a cease-fire was announced. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Bill Hagerty (R-TN) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) visited on official congressional delegations. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to Israel last week for a goodbye party for the head of Mossad and former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley announced plans to visit with a Christians United for Israel delegation — even though neither of them currently holds public office.

It’s still two and a half years before any voters will head to the polls for the 2024 primaries, but potential candidates — like Cruz, Pompeo and Haley, who are all seen as likely 2024 Republican presidential contenders — are often trying to position themselves for the next race. Pompeo, for instance, was spotted in Iowa in March. 

“I think for Republicans in particular, visiting Israel and being supportive of Israel has now become a requirement,” said Elliott Abrams, currently a senior fellow at the Center on Foreign Relations who served in diplomatic roles in the administrations of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Trump. 

But Abrams notes that politicians’ visits to Israel are not a new phenomenon, even if they have increased in recent years. “This is not new, and I think it’s particularly unsurprising right now, because you’ve got political change happening in Israel, because you just had a war, because you have a new American president who’s just setting his policy toward Israel and the Middle East. So it strikes me as pretty normal and predictable.”

Jewish Insider reached out to nearly a dozen Republicans who are considered to be potential 2024 contenders to see whether any of them have plans to visit Israel in the near future. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie told JI that they have no such plans, though all of them have traveled to Israel in the past. 

Spokespeople for Sens. Josh Hawley (R-MO), Tim Scott (R-SC) and Ben Sasse (R-NE); South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott; former Vice President Mike Pence; and former President Donald Trump did not respond when asked whether they plan to travel to Israel. 

Presidential candidates have a history of traveling to Israel while campaigning, although such visits usually occur much closer to an election. The late Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) toured Israel on a Senate “fact-finding” delegation in March 2008 during the Republican primaries. A few months later, after clinching the Democratic nomination, Barack Obama visited the country for the first time. Now-Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), the Republican who ran against Obama four years later, visited Israel in July 2012. Trump was scheduled to travel to Israel as a candidate in 2015, but canceled the trip after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly criticized Trump’s campaign pledge to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. 

Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Bill Hagerty (R-TN) flank Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a meeting in Jerusalem.

President Joe Biden did not travel internationally during the 2020 campaign — most of his general election campaigning took place virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic — but he has visited the country on several other occasions, including several times as vice president. 

Many lawmakers from both parties have visited Israel on congressional delegations or on biennial trips for freshman lawmakers run by the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation. Pressure from other pro-Israel groups has also highlighted the political importance of these trips. “I think that as America’s strongest ally in the region and one of our closest allies in the world, elected officials who are able should make an effort to visit Israel,” Pastor John Hagee, the founder and chairman of CUFI, told JI. 

Republican visits to Israel might also be linked to the 2022 midterms, when Republicans will seek to regain control of the House and Senate. “It’s going to be very important for the Republicans to recapture both houses of Congress in 2022,” said Marc Zell, an American attorney who lives in Israel and is the chairman of the Israel chapter of Republicans Abroad. “I think we have a really good chance of doing that, and Israel is part of the formula that many candidates will adopt as they prepare for 2022.”

Support for the U.S.-Israel alliance has become a key tenet of Republican campaigns at both the federal and state levels in recent years. “As a state governor, Gov. DeSantis is not in the same position to enact foreign policy as, say, U.S. senators,” his press secretary, Christina Pushaw, told JI, but she noted that his “first trip abroad as governor, in 2019, was to Israel for a historic business-development mission to promote stronger ties between Florida and Israel.” 

This trend is not new. Governors and state officials have traveled to Israel on trade missions for decades. Tim Pawlenty, a former Republican governor of Minnesota, traveled to Israel on a 2008 trade mission ahead of a possible presidential run. But the first Minnesota governor to travel to Israel, Arne Carlson, had done so 15 years prior, in 1993. 

One thing that has changed in recent years is the growing affinity between Republican lawmakers and Netanyahu, who has cultivated close relationships with Republicans in the U.S. Netanyahu welcomed Trump to Israel in May 2017 on the president’s first foreign trip while in office, and in early 2020, Netanyahu referred to Trump as “the greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House.” 

With a new Israeli coalition set to take control from Netanyahu in the Knesset, Zell suggested that Republican support for the country might falter. Mike Evans, a prominent evangelical Christian, said at a Monday press conference that his followers would “go into the opposition” with Netanyahu rather than support Israel’s potential new government. 

Republican 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney visits the Western Wall on July 29, 2012 in Jerusalem’s old city, Israel.

“I’m not sure that we’re going to be seeing the same frequency of visits by Republican legislators and party leaders in the event that the [Naftali] Bennett-[Yair] Lapid government actually is sworn in,” Zell noted. “They might come to try to keep Israel in line with what Republicans consider proper U.S. policy, or they may stay away because they don’t want to have any friction with the new government on the issues where this new government may be playing up to the Biden administration.”

However, there is no evidence that this view has been adopted by any prominent American lawmakers. While visiting Israel last week, Sen. Graham stressed that U.S. support for Israel is not contingent upon who governs the country. “No matter who they select to run the government here in Israel, American will be in your camp,” Graham said at the press conference. “If a new government is formed, the relationship will stay the same between us and Israel.”

Recent Republican travel to Israel could also stem from a desire to signal politicians’ opposition to Biden’s policies in the region. Rather than relating directly to any political campaigns, “I think it has more to do with the critique of the current administration’s foreign policy,” Zell explained. 

This might also explain why Democratic senators have not traveled to Israel since the conflict: A number of senior administration officials, including Secretary of State Tony Blinken and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs Hady Amr, have already done so. Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) visited the Middle East in early May, before the fighting broke out between Israel and Hamas. Coons visited the UAE to discuss nuclear negotiations with Iran, and Murphy stopped in Oman, Jordan and Qatar to discuss the war in Yemen.

Ultimately, the reason candidates visit Israel is not to influence policy, which many can’t yet do. It “gives you the opportunity, when you’re writing an op-ed or making a speech, to say, ‘I stood there across from Hamas-ruled Gaza,’ or, ‘I could see from the U.N. observation post Hamas 1000 yards away,’” Abrams said.

Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) laid much of the blame for the recent conflict between Israel and Gaza on the Biden administration’s Middle East policies, in an interview with Jewish Insider on Wednesday. 

Hagerty, who returned from a multi-day trip to Israel on Wednesday morning, said he traveled to the region to “show my unwavering support for Israel.” 

The Tennessee senator characterized the recent conflict as a “test of the will of the Biden administration” on behalf of Iran and its proxies.

“This onslaught of violence and terrorism has been encouraged by policy positions coming out of the Biden administration because their embrace of Iran has emboldened Iran and its proxies like Hamas to step up and test this administration,” he said. “I think the Biden administration has put us in great jeopardy by reengaging with the Iranians… I think that puts the entire region at risk.”

Hagerty’s comments stand in stark contrast to those of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who also visited the region this week. Graham argued on Tuesday that most Democrats, including Biden, are strongly pro-Israel.

“You’ve got to look at how they vote. It’s hard to know what’s in a person’s heart… When they vote in a way that’s not supportive, I think that sends a very bad message,” Hagerty said, before adding that his constituents in Tennessee are pro-Israel regardless of party affiliation.

Hagerty confirmed that Israeli leaders told both him and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), with whom Hagerty was traveling, that they plan to request $1 billion in additional funding from the U.S. to resupply and upgrade Iron Dome, as first announced by Graham on Tuesday. Hagerty declined to say if he expects — as Graham does — that Biden and congressional Democrats will support that request.

“If every member of Congress had the benefit of what Senators Graham, Cruz and I saw, in terms of the effectiveness of the Iron Dome… I think that they would be supportive of that,” Hagerty said.

While in Israel, Hagerty met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, Defense Minister Benny Gantz, National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat and Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz, as well as members of the Israeli Defense Forces and business and think-tank leaders.

Speaking to JI less than two hours after Israeli opposition party leaders announced they had agreed to form a new government, setting the stage for Netanyahu’s ouster, Hagerty predicted that U.S.-Israel relations would not be impacted by the potential change in government.

“It should have no change at all. Israel remains our ally. It has since 1948 and will continue with our ally,” Hagerty said. “I look forward to working with Israeli leadership, whomever it may be, over the course of the coming year… I’ve gotta believe that the strategic interests remain the same.”

Hagerty did not travel to the Palestinian territories or meet with Palestinian leaders during his trip. He told JI that “the Palestinian leaders have got some problems to clear up,” pointing to Hamas’ control of Gaza and the Palestinian Authority’s ongoing payments to the families of terrorists.

“I think we want to be engaged with the Palestinian people, but the Palestinian Authority and Hamas both are very challenged in terms of the lack of leadership there and the terrorism that results from that,” he said. “My most important point right now is for us to show our solidarity with Israel.”

Hagerty said that to advance permanent peace between Israel and the Palestinians, the U.S. should continue to work to facilitate regional economic cooperation through agreements, pointing to last year’s Abraham Accords. Hagerty also suggested that the U.S. should restrict aid to the Palestinian Authority and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). 

“[The Palestinian Authority] walked away from the vision for prosperity that was placed before them. A plan was put before them that would have created a million jobs for the Palestinian people,” Hagerty said. “That’s why it shocks me that the Biden administration would come back, just in a knee-jerk fashion… to re-initiate aid to the Palestinian Authority with no preconditions, to re-initiate aid to UNRWA with no preconidtions.”

“We know we need to build economic prosperity in the region,” Hagerty continued, “and when the Palestinian Authority sees that it’s in their interest, which it should be, when the Palestinain people push them in that direction, I hope they’ll find their way to the bargaining table.”

In a press conference from the roof of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said that the Israeli government plans to seek significant additional funding for the Iron Dome missile defense system and announced a new bipartisan proposal to counter Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Graham said Israel will request $1 billion in Pentagon funding to replenish and upgrade the Iron Dome system, which intercepted thousands of rockets aimed at Israel during the recent conflict with Hamas. Defense Minister Benny Gantz is expected to make the ask during meetings with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin later this week.

“Iron Dome performed incredibly well, saving thousands of Israeli lives and tens of thousands of Palestinian lives,” Graham said. “I would imagine that the administration would say yes to this request and it will sail through Congress.”

The new funding will likely have support from the majority of Congress, though the request is likely to raise controversy among some congressional Democrats. Last month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and several House Democrats led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) attempted to block a $735 million sale of guided munitions to the Jewish state. 

Graham sought to downplay the extent of Democratic opposition to the aid, despite efforts by some Republicans to accuse Democrats at large — and President Joe Biden specifically — of having abandoned Israel and sided with Hamas.

“There’s been a big dustup over the last engagement with Hamas and the State of Israel in the United States, but I’m here to tell you there is a wide and deep support for Israel among the Democratic Party,” he said. “I want to thank President Biden for standing with Israel during this last conflict. I appreciate the administration’s willingness to seek from Congress more money for the Iron Dome system.”

Some of the House’s strongest critics of U.S. aid to Israel — including Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Betty McCollum (D-MN) — have expressed support for Iron Dome as a life-saving tool.

The South Carolina senator also discussed plans to propose an alternative to the Biden administration’s moves to seek a “longer and stronger” nuclear deal with Iran amid ongoing negotiations in Vienna.

“If the international community allows the Iranians to enrich, the Arabs are going to want that same capability, and we’re off on the road of a nuclear arms race in the Mideast,” the senator said on Tuesday. “‘Longer and stronger’ is not possible,” he added.

Graham said that he — along with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and an opponent of the 2015 deal — are planning to propose an alternative deal that would allow Iran and Arab states to develop nuclear reactors to be powered with fuel from an international fuel bank. That proposal would prevent participating states from conducting enrichment.

“Without enrichment, you can’t make a bomb,” Graham explained, adding that such a proposal would test whether Iran is sincere about wanting nuclear power, rather than a nuclear bomb.

Graham also announced plans to propose a defense agreement with Israel similar to Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization treaty, which would obligate the U.S. to intervene when Israel is attacked.

Graham has met with high-ranking Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, Gantz and opposition leader Yair Lapid, since arriving in Israel on Monday. 

The senator met on Monday with Netanyahu, who lauded Graham saying “no one has done more for Israel than you, Lindsey.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met today, at the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem, with US Senator @LindseyGrahamSC.https://t.co/aB73kVoizS pic.twitter.com/DPrdCyPeU9

— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) May 31, 2021

“Nobody does more to protect America from radical Islam than our friends in Israel,” Graham responded, brandishing a sign reading “More for Israel” in English and Hebrew. “This sign says all you need to know about my trip. What happens with Iran matters not only to America but the world.”

Speaking to reporters, Graham acknowledged Netanyahu’s precarious political position as Lapid and Yamina head Naftali Bennett appear close to forming a coalition government.

“No matter who they select to run the government here in Israel, American will be in your camp,” Graham said in the press conference. “If a new government is formed, the relationship will stay the same between us and Israel.”

“If you like politics, this is the place to come,” Graham quipped in a video on Tuesday.

Day 2 in #Israel and on the way to Ashkelon. pic.twitter.com/u0xYz6svTV

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 1, 2021

House Democrats pushed back on Wednesday against Republican attack ads accusing them of not supporting Israeli security after their votes on a GOP procedural motion last week.

The controversy centers around a failed motion to recommit introduced by Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX) last Thursday which would have blocked passage of a supplemental funding bill for Capitol security — which House Republicans opposed — by returning it back to the Appropriations Committee, potentially killing it entirely. 

Gonzales also proposed an amendment to the bill for Appropriations Committee consideration that would have entirely replaced the Capitol security funding with additional funds for Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system. The House vote, however, was only on sending the security supplement bill back to the committee, not on the Iron Dome amendment.

The motion failed largely along party lines, with all Democrats present voting against it, as well as one Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY). Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) did not vote on the measure.

House Republican leadership has sought to use the vote to paint House Democrats as unsupportive of Israel. Meanwhile, the conservative group American Action Network launched a five-figure ad buy, according to Fox News, claiming four Democrats — Reps. Elaine Luria (D-VA), Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), Carolyn Bourdeaux (D-GA) and Susan Wild (D-PA) — abandoned Israel while it was under attack by voting against Gonzales’s motion.

Luria called the attacks “disgraceful” and “a flat-out lie.”

“The Republicans have taken this as a vehicle to just create a narrative that’s false and say that based on this procedural vote we — being every Democrat — were somehow voting against Israel and against supporting the Iron Dome,” Luria told Jewish Insider. “It’s absurd, it’s harmful, to try to make an issue that’s important to the security of Israel, to our strongest ally in the Middle East, and to try to use it as a political tool, especially when it’s just a straight-out lie.”

Bourdeaux similarly characterized the attacks as scurrilous.

“I voted to provide critical funding for law enforcement at the Capitol after 140 officers were injured in the January 6th attack,” Bourdeaux explained to JI. “Republicans opposed funding for the Capitol Police and our National Guard, and in a bizarre procedural gimmick, tried to make this about funding for Iron Dome. This kind of nonsense is why Republicans lost in Georgia.”

The motion to recommit was one of multiple attempts by Republicans last week to put Democrats in a bind on matters relating to Israel. Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL) unsuccessfully attempted to use a procedural maneuver to scuttle planned votes on opioid addiction treatments and condemning anti-Asian hate crimes and instead hold a vote on sanctioning Hamas — legislation that passed the House in 2019. 

Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA), who was leading House Democrats on the floor at the time, called Mast’s move a “red herring” which “would hand control of the House over to [Republicans].”

“Let’s not distract from the bills that we’re here to move forward today,” Scanlon added. House Democrats voted unanimously — with the exception of Golden, who again did not vote — to proceed with business as planned.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) attempted to capitalize on the Gonzales procedural vote, alleging that “Instead of standing with Israel, Democrats continue to stand aside.” And on the Mast legislation, he told The Washington Free Beacon: “Today every member in the House will have a choice between siding with our ally or siding with a status quo that will only perpetuate the unrest… the House should make it clear to the world that we stand united in support of Israel.”

Luria criticized the attacks as a transparent campaign tactic.

“This is to go after Democrats [in] seats they think they can and want to win back so that they can hand the gavel to McCarthy,” Luria said. “It’s purely a political maneuver. I think this is an issue that shouldn’t be politicized. I can understand policy differences, but strong bipartisan support of Israel in the U.S. Congress is not something that should be politicized because I think it sends the wrong message to the rest of the world.”

“The fact that anyone wants to send a message that our Congress is somehow divided on [Iron Dome] is really damaging,” she continued.

Luria emphasized that she has introduced and supported a range of measures intended to bolster Israel’s security and combat regional threats and supports the $3.8 billion in military aid the U.S. sends to Israel annually. All four members targeted in the attack ads also signed onto a bipartisan letter earlier this year expressing support for continuing unconditioned U.S. aid to Israel.

AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told JI the organization “[does] not take a position on these types of procedural motions. We are confident that there will be overwhelming bipartisan support when Congress votes on funding for Iron Dome.”

A group of progressive House Democrats plans to encourage Secretary of State Tony Blinken to consider alternatives to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism, suggesting two definitions that allow for broader criticism of Israel. 

A draft of a letter to Blinken obtained by Jewish Insider, which is being led by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and has been signed by Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI), Andy Levin (D-MI), Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), urges Blinken to “consider multiple definitions of antisemitism, including two new definitions that have been formulated and embraced by the Jewish community,” pointing to the Nexus Document and the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.

The IHRA definition, first developed in the mid-aughts by a collective of government officials and subject experts, was used as guidance by successive Republican and Democratic administrations dating back to the George W. Bush administration, and codified by a 2019 executive order from former President Donald Trump. The push to codify the definition was born out of a 2014 meeting in then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) office.

While there is some overlap between the two more recent definitions and the IHRA working definition of antisemitism — which has been adopted by dozens of countries, many of them European — both the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, a majority of whose signatories are academics, and the Nexus Document, which was authored by U.S.-based academics, allow more space for criticism of Israel. The Jerusalem Declaration describes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement as “not, in and of themselves, antisemitic.”

The Nexus Document pushes back on the idea — included in some of the IHRA definition’s associated examples — that applying double standards to Israel is inherently antisemitic. The Nexus Document argues instead that “paying disproportionate attention to Israel and treating Israel differently than other countries is not prima facie proof of anti-Semitism” and that “there are numerous reasons for devoting special attention to Israel and treating Israel differently.” The Jerusalem Declaration similarly argues that boycotts of Israel are not inherently antisemitic.

“While the IHRA definition can be informative, in order to most effectively combat antisemitism, we should use all of the best tools at our disposal,” the letter argues. The letter will remain open for signatures until Tuesday.

Left-wing Jewish groups, including J Street, have been vocal about their concerns with the IHRA definition.

Abe Foxman, the former director of the Anti-Defamation League who led the organization while the IHRA definition was being developed, argued that this criticism stems from disagreements with Israeli policy, rather than legitimate issues with the IHRA definition itself.

“The common denominator of all the groups who don’t like the current definition are groups that have issues with Israel,” Foxman said. “[The IHRA definition] included a new dimension of antisemitism which was anti-Israel and anti-Zionism because in the last 20 years or so, antisemitism metastasized to use Israel as a euphemism for attacking Jews.”

In a letter to the American Zionist Movement in February, Blinken said that the Biden administration “enthusiastically embraces” the IHRA definition, indicating that efforts to implement alternative definitions may struggle to gain traction at the State Department. 

Foxman told JI that he is concerned that considering other definitions of antisemitism, as Schakowsky’s letter urges, would “water down” the State Department’s efforts to fight antisemitism and could also lead the range of other governments and private institutions that have adopted the IHRA definition to reconsider doing so.

Other House Democrats have defended the IHRA definition in the past and its adoption by the federal government. In a 2019 Times of Israel op-ed, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) urged the government to adopt the IHRA definition as “an important tool to guide our government’s response to antisemitism.”

“Opponents of this definition argue that it would encroach on Americans’ right to freedom of speech,” Deutch wrote. “But this definition was drafted not to regulate free speech or punish people for expressing their beliefs, however hateful they may be. It would not suddenly make it illegal to tweet denial of the Holocaust or go on television accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel than the United States. But it would identify those views as anti-Semitic.”

In January, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations adopted the IHRA definition, and it has the support of major mainstream Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League.

Read the full text of the letter here:

Dear Secretary Blinken:

We write to thank you and the entire Biden Administration for your commitment to fighting against the rising threat of antisemitism, both globally, and here in the United States. We applaud your prioritization of combatting this ancient hatred. In carrying out this critical work, we urge you to consider multiple definitions of antisemitism, including two new definitions that have been formulated and embraced by the Jewish community.

In 2016, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), of which the United States is a member, adopted a non-legally binding definition of antisemitism. The Department of State began using this working definition at this time. In September of 2018, the Trump Administration announced that it was expanding the use of the IHRA definition to the Department of Education. This was followed by the 2019 “White House Executive Order on Combatting Antisemitism” that formally directed federal agencies to consider the IHRA working definition and contemporary examples of antisemitism in enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

While the IHRA definition can be informative, in order to most effectively combat antisemitism, we should use all of the best tools at our disposal. Recently, two new definitions have been introduced that can and should be equally considered by the State Department and the entire Administration. The first is the Nexus Document, drafted by the Nexus Task Force, “which examines the issues at the nexus of antisemitism and Israel in American politics.” The Task Force is a project of the Knight Program on Media and Religion at the Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism at USC. The definition is designed as a guide for policymakers and community leaders as they grapple with the complexities at the intersection of Israel and antisemitism.

Another valuable resource is the recently released Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA).  The JDA is a tool to identify, confront and raise awareness about antisemitism as it manifests in countries around the world today. It includes a preamble, definition, and a set of 15 guidelines that provide detailed guidance for those seeking to recognize antisemitism in order to craft responses. It was developed by a group of scholars in the fields of Holocaust history, Jewish studies, and Middle East studies to meet what has become a growing challenge: providing clear guidance to identify and fight antisemitism while protecting free expression.

These two efforts are the work of hundreds of scholars and experts in the fields of antisemitism, Israel and Middle East Policy, and Jewish communal affairs, and have been helpful to us as we grapple with these complex issues. We believe that the Administration should, in addition to the IHRA definition, consider these two important documents as resources to help guide your thinking and actions when addressing issues of combatting antisemitism.

Once again, we thank you and President Biden for prioritizing this important matter and urge you to use all tools at your disposal to combat the threat of antisemitism.

Former Israeli defense officials offered differing views of the incoming Biden administration’s top Middle East priorities this week. Former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon celebrated the former vice president’s victory, while former Defense Minister Naftali Bennett praised President Donald Trump for his work in the region and expressed hope that President-elect Joe Biden’s administration will chart a different course from previous Democratic administrations.

Bennett said the outgoing Trump administration “was simply outstanding in so many dimensions of support of Israel,” highlighting the U.S. Embassy move to Jerusalem; the killing earlier this year of Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Force; and the maximum pressure campaign on Iran. 

For Ayalon, Biden’s election and the selection of his national security team are a welcome moment for the security and future of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. 

In a recent interview with Jewish Insider, Ayalon emphasized that the Biden administration’s emphasis on diplomacy will prioritize both resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as part of a broad initiative to move forward with advancing peace and countering Iran’s efforts to destabilize the region. 

“Israel will not be safe, it will not be a Jewish democracy, unless we come to an agreement with the Palestinians,” posited Ayalon, who co-founded the Israeli NGO Blue White Future in 2009 to push for a negotiated peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians. “I believe that in order to create this Sunni coalition as a future basis to confront Iran and create more stability in the region, we have to come to an agreement with the Palestinians.” 

Ayalon suggested that while Israelis appreciated Trump’s support of Israel, the foreign policy team Biden has assembled will gauge Israeli concerns about a return to the Obama administration’s approach to the conflict, which was perceived by Israeli leadership at the time as aggressive and somewhat hostile. “Even if they are the same people [who served in the Obama administration], they are older and they are much more experienced,” he stressed.

Israeli leaders may also be more willing to consider peace process concessions depending on the next administration’s approach to Iran, Ayalon said. “If Israelis will feel that [a two-state solution] is the price that Israel will have to pay in order to remove the Iranian threat, a majority will support it,” he suggested. 

Bennett expressed different expectations from the Biden administration. In a Zoom call hosted by the Zionist Organization of America on Wednesday, Bennett — whose party, Yamina, is polling in second place behind its right-wing rival Likud — projected that the Biden administration will learn from the mistakes of the past and take a different approach that will be more acceptable to the nationalist camp. 

“The other path has been taken so many times and failed so many times, and brought immense damage and suffering on the region,” Bennett asserted. “There is a price to pay for failed so-called peace attempts — usually it ends up with another round of violence and people die. And I think the incoming administration is very experienced. They’ve been there, seen that, done that. I’m not ignoring the well-known opinions, but I do think that we need to sit down and think thoroughly about how to manage the disagreements that we might have.” 

It is unlikely that U.S.-Israel ties will be as strained as they were during the Obama administration, Bennett said, explaining that the peace process is likely to be “far down the list” of Biden’s priorities. Bennett also expressed hope that “stopping Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon does not become a partisan issue” in the U.S.

The former defense minister predicted that as more Arab countries express willingness to normalize relations with Israel, the paradigm of first resolving the Palestinian issue will become irrelevant. “I’ve always said that I’m okay with ‘land for peace’ — we are willing to accept land for peace from anyone who wants to provide us [with land],” Bennett quipped, adding, that “more seriously, the notion of ‘land for peace’ is crazy, and certainly, this will be one of the issues that we’re going to have to address.” 

As President-elect Joe Biden’s cabinet shapes up and the final few days of the 116th Congress tick by, national Jewish and pro-Israel groups are planning out their agendas for the next administration and new Congress.

Priorities and approaches, laid out in a series of interviews with Jewish Insider, vary from group to group, but frequent themes for at least three — including J Street, the American Jewish Committee and the Jewish Federations of North America — unsurprisingly include diplomacy with Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and tackling domestic antisemitism.

Some of the organizations, like JFNA, have communicated with Biden’s transition team in the weeks following the election. The group laid out a detailed set of priorities in a memo to Biden’s transition team, according to Elana Broitman, JFNA’s senior vice president for public affairs, that fall into several categories including COVID relief, increasing nonprofit security funding and fighting antisemitism. Broitman added that the organization is pushing legislators to codify the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism, prioritize healthcare and increase efforts to support Holocaust survivors.

J Street’s policy agenda includes reentering the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and deescalating military tensions, rolling back Trump administration actions the organization sees as antithetical to Israeli-Palestinian peace, opposing annexation and settlement expansion and otherwise promoting peace.

Dylan Williams, J Street’s senior vice president for policy and strategy, told JI the Biden administration should take a number of major early steps toward peace, including reestablishing a separate consulate in Jerusalem to serve Palestinians, reissuing State Department guidance on discussing settlements and reinstating and expanding humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, including through the U.N. agency tasked with working with Palestinians.

Williams added that the organization has urged Palestinian leadership to “take advantage of the opportunity that this new administration provides” and change its policy of paying Palestinian prisoners jailed for terrorist activities — something the Palestinian Authority is reportedly working toward.

“I think that you will see a vast amount of opportunity for improvements in U.S.-Palestinian relations, in the event that Palestinian leadership follows through on those discussions,” he added.

In the longer term, Williams argued that Congress will be critical in pushing back against “deepening occupation and creeping annexation,” and called for legislators to investigate the Trump administration’s efforts to “blur the distinction between Israel and the settlements,” introducing new measures to clarify that distinction and conducting oversight of how Israel is using American aid.

J Street communications director Logan Bayroff added that he’s hopeful the Biden transition team and Congress will signal their commitment to re-entering the Iran deal to counter what he described as the Trump administration’s efforts to foreclose the possibility of diplomacy with Iran.

“Trump’s trying to start a lot of fires and deliberately trying to provoke the Iranians into saying, ‘Well, we can’t work with any American administration,’” Bayroff said.

The American Jewish Committee, which opposed the JCPOA in 2015, is taking a more restrained approach. “We had grave concerns about the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” said Jason Isaacson, the group’s chief policy and political affairs officer. “We will be urging the Biden administration to work in close coordination with our European and Middle East allies.”

The group — in contrast with J Street — will encourage the administration not to “remove from the U.S. negotiating arsenal the leverage that exists because of the sanctions imposed under President Trump,” Isaacson added.

AJC intends to focus on two pieces of legislation it supported during the current session of Congress in the event that they do not pass this year: the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act and the Partnership for Peace Act.

AIPAC declined to discuss its policy agenda until it announces its priorities for the new Congress next year, but spokesman Marshall Wittmann said: “We look forward to working with the incoming administration and Congress on an agenda of further strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship and advancing our mutual interests in the region.”

Each group will also have to contend with a potentially divided Congress, should Democrats not sweep January’s Senate run-offs, and a shrunken Democratic majority in the House, which will likely create hurdles for lawmaking on a range of issues.

While Williams was not optimistic about the possibility of bipartisan compromise, he noted that a divided Congress is “a situation we’ve been in for some time.”  

“I can’t point to anything that we’re not pushing for anymore, just because the Senate doesn’t happen to be held by Democrats,” he added.

Leaders from AJC and JFNA highlighted their groups’ abilities to work with both Republicans and Democrats.

“AJC has always been an organization that values nonpartisanship, that worked with members of Congress from both sides, administrations of both parties, that hews to the center representing the broad mainstream of the American Jewish community,” Isaacson said. “I believe that in the center lie solutions to many of the problems we’re discussing.”

“We’ve been in the business of advocacy on issues of concern to our community for more than a century… We have found ways over the years to work with leaders on both sides of the Hill and both sides of the aisle,” Isaacson continued. “I believe the message from the voters is stop playing games. Try solutions.”

JFNA President Eric Fingerhut said his organization is in a similar position.

“Our strength is in bipartisan work,” he said, noting JFNA’s longstanding relationships with officials in Washington and among state and local legislators.

“This is, I think, the moment when the longstanding work of our community to build relationships on all sides comes to fruition,” Fingerhut said. “We’re in a very strong position to put forward the priorities of the Jewish community… We have leaders who are on both sides of the aisle, and we’ve always had that.” 

A letter sent by several dozen congressional Democrats to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo this week raises concerns about the Israeli government’s demolition of a Palestinian Bedouin community earlier this month.

The Israeli government demolished the Khirbet Humsah village in the West Bank, displacing 73 Palestinians, in early November. The Israeli military claimed the settlement was illegally constructed in a firing range in the Jordan Valley.

The letter, spearheaded by Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) urges Pompeo, who is visiting Israel this week, to communicate U.S. disapproval of the demolition to the Israeli government, and push the Israeli government to cease similar actions going forward.

The letter — which describes the demolition as “a serious violation of international law” and a “grave humanitarian issue” — also requests information on whether Israel used military equipment it received from the U.S. in the demolition.

Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-CA), one of the letter’s signatories, told Jewish Insider he signed on because he sees the Israeli government’s actions as impediments to peace.

“I think these Israeli demolitions bring us further away from a two-state solution at a time when we need to see both sides moving in the opposite and more peaceful direction,” Lowenthal said. “We do not believe the U.S. should support, directly or indirectly, any action which undermines a two-state solution.”

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) characterized Pompeo’s failure to address the demolitions as particularly concerning given his upcoming visit to a West Bank settlement.

“For the secretary of state to visit the West Bank without even acknowledging the home demolitions, that’s counter to American values and our framework for a two state solution,” Khanna said. “The only way we’ll make progress in the region is by standing up for both Israel’s security and the human rights of Palestinians.”

Other notable signatories include Reps. Joaquín Castro (D-TX) — a candidate for the House Foreign Affairs Committee chairmanship — Debbie Dingell (D-MI), Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Nydia Velázquez (D-NY).

In a new book looking back at his eight years in the White House, former President Barack Obama details his sometimes turbulent relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu going back to 2009, when both world leaders took office. A Promised Land, the first of two memoirs the former president is writing about his time in office, is set to be released on Tuesday. 

Obama describes Netanyahu as “smart, canny, tough and a gifted communicator” who could be “charming, or at least solicitous” when it benefited him, Obama writes in the book, a copy of which was reviewed in advance by Jewish Insider.

Obama points to a conversation the pair had in a Chicago airport lounge in 2005, shortly after Obama was elected to the Senate, in which Netanyahu was “lavishing praise” on him for “an inconsequential pro-Israel bill” the newly elected senator had supported when he served in the Illinois state legislature. But when it came to policy disagreements, Obama observed, Netanyahu was able to use his familiarity with U.S. politics and media to push back against efforts by his administration.

Netanyahu’s “vision of himself as the chief defender of the Jewish people against calamity allowed him to justify almost anything that would keep him in power,” Obama wrote.

The former president writes that his chief of staff at the time, former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, warned him when he took office, “You don’t get progress on peace when the American president and the Israeli prime minister come from different political backgrounds.” Obama said he began to understand that perspective as he spent time with Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. 

Looking back, Obama wrote, he sometimes wondered whether “things might have played out differently” if there was a different president in the Oval Office, if someone other than Netanyahu represented Israel and if Abbas had been younger. 

In the book, the former president also grumbles about the treatment he received from leaders of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), who questioned his policies on Israel. Obama wrote that as Israeli politics moved to the right, AIPAC’s broad policy positions shifted accordingly, “even when Israel took actions that were contrary to U.S. policy” and that lawmakers and candidates who “criticized Israel policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly anti-Semitic) and [were] confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election.” 

Obama writes that he was “on the receiving end” of a “whisper campaign” that portrayed him as being “insufficiently supportive — or even hostile toward — Israel” during his 2008 presidential run. “On Election Day, I’d end up getting more than 70 percent of the Jewish vote, but as far as many AIPAC board members were concerned, I remained suspect, a man of divided loyalties; someone whose support for Israel, as one of [David Axelrod’s] friends colorfully put it, wasn’t ‘felt in his kishkes’ — ‘guts,’ in Yiddish.” 

Obama wrote that former deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes, who worked as a speechwriter for the 2008 campaign, told him that the attacks against him were a result of him being “a Black man with a Muslim name who lived in the same neighborhood as Louis Farrakhan and went to Jeremia Wright’s church” and not based on his policy views that were aligned with the positions of other political candidates. 

The former president writes that while in college, he was intrigued by the influence of Jewish philosophers on the civil rights movement. He noted that some of his “most stalwart friends and supporters” came from the Chicago’s Jewish community and that he had admired how Jewish voters “tended to be more progressive” on issues than any other“ethnic group. Obama writes that a feeling of being bound to the Jewish community by “a common story of exile and suffering” made him “fiercely protective” of the rights of the Jewish people to have a state of their own, though these values also made it “impossible to ignore the conditions under which Palestinians in the occupied territories were forced to live.”

President Barack Obama talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, center, and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in the Oval Office Monday, May 18, 2009.

According to Obama, while Republican lawmakers cared less about the right of Palestinians to have a state of their own, Democratic members of Congress — who represented districts with sizable Jewish populations — were reluctant to speak out about the matter because they were “worried” about losing support from AIPAC’s key supporters and donors and imperiling their reelection chances. 

In the memoir, Obama recalled his visit to the Western Wall as a presidential candidate in the summer of 2008 and the publication of the prayer note he stuffed into the cracks of the wall by an Israeli newspaper. The episode was a reminder of the price that came with stepping onto the world stage, he wrote. “Get used to it, I told myself. It’s part of the deal.”

The book provides an inside look into the political jockeying between the Israeli government and the administration over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Obama maintains that he thought it was “reasonable” to ask for Israel, which he viewed as the “stronger party,” to take a “bigger first step” and freeze settlements in the West Bank. But “as expected,” Netanyahu’s response was “sharply negative.” That was followed by an aggressive pressure campaign by the prime minister’s allies in Washington. 

“The White House phones started ringing off the hook,” Obama recounts, as his national security team fielded calls from lawmakers, Jewish leaders and reporters “wondering why we were picking on Israel.” He wrote that Rhodes once arrived late for a staff meeting “looking particularly harried” after a lengthy phone call with a “highly agitated” liberal Democratic congressman who pushed back against the administration’s attempt to stop settlement activity. 

Obama accused Netanyahu of an “orchestrated” effort to put his administration on the defensive, “reminding me that normal policy differences with an Israeli prime minister exacted a domestic political cost” that didn’t exist in relations with other world leaders. 

In 2010, when Netanyahu visited Washington to attend the annual AIPAC policy conference, media reports claimed that Obama deliberately “snubbed” Netanyahu by walking out from a tense meeting and leaving the Israeli leader and his aides in the Roosevelt Room until they came up with a solution to the impasse in peace talks. 

But in the book, Obama insists he suggested to Netanyahu to “pause” their meeting and reconvene after he returned from a previously scheduled commitment. The discussion, the former president said, ran well over the allotted time, and “Netanyahu still had a few items he wanted to cover.” Netanyahu said “he was happy to wait,” Obama writes, and the second meeting ended on “cordial terms.” However, the next morning, Emanuel “stormed into” the Oval Office citing the media reports that he humiliated Netanyahu, “leading to accusations” that the president had allowed his personal feelings to damage the U.S.-Israel relationship. “That was a rare instance when I outcursed Rahm,” Obama writes, referencing Emanuel’s well-known use of profanity.

As the Biden-Harris transition team begins to build out its incoming administration and speak with foreign leaders, Israeli political observers caution that an immediate return to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran — while renegotiating the agreement’s terms — could put the Biden administration and the Israeli government on a collision course. 

“I believe that on most issues, we will be able to work with the new administration. But I think the key question is the Iranian issue,” former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon said in an interview with Jewish Insider. “This is a crucial issue for Israel. We heard Joe Biden speak about re-entering the JCPOA with some amendments. And the question is how it will look at the end. If the U.S. returns to an agreement that will be similar to the [previous] agreement, it means that Israel will have to recalculate its approach regarding Iran.” 

Danon suggested that if a new Iran deal were to have the same outcome, just “with different titles,” Israel would be obligated to oppose the deal and “take the necessary steps to ensure Iran will never obtain nuclear capabilities.” 

The former Israeli diplomat, who is a member of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party, said that Israel will have to “carefully” examine the Biden administration’s approach to the Middle East and engagement with international organizations as it shifts away from President Donald Trump’s policies. Danon, who represented Israel at the U.N. during the last year of former President Barack Obama’s second term and for most of Trump’s time in office, said that while he expects some changes to Israel’s standing at the U.N. — especially if the new administration rejoins the Human Rights Council and reinstates currently frozen U.S. funds to the U.N. body that supports Palestinian refugees — “I think we will still have the support of the U.S., but it will require more effort from our side.” 

Danon added that if Biden is “supportive of Israel, he will gain the trust and support of Israelis very fast.” 

Israeli author Yossi Klein Halevi suggested that the two sides will “inevitably come into conflict” over the Iranian issue, predicting a “tough fight” for Israel to keep the U.S. from returning to the terms of the 2015 deal. 

“The Palestinian issue is not going to cause a major rupture between Israel and America,” explained Klein Halevi, a senior fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem. “Biden isn’t Obama. He’s not going to go to war for a two-state solution. He is a seasoned enough politician to understand what Obama did not understand, which is that you don’t go for broke on an issue that you don’t have sufficient leverage on for both sides.” 

But on the Iranian threat, he argued, Israel has more leverage than it had in 2015. In the wake of the recently signed normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, Klein Halevi suggested, Israel now has “a shared strategic structure to confront the international community.” 

On Tuesday, Netanyahu pushed back against the notion that strained ties between Israel and the Democratic Party in recent years would undercut a good working relationship with the Biden administration. “What I see before my eyes is not Democrats and not Republicans. It is just the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said during a speech at the Knesset. “I am committed to stand behind the interests that are crucial to our future and our existence and this is how I will continue even with the next American administration.”

In his remarks, Netanyahu pointed to his decades-long relationship with Biden and the personal moments they shared “that are beyond politics and beyond diplomacy.”

The Israeli premier said that over the last four years, he has met with 134 Democratic members of Congress — of the 292 who have visited Israel since 2017 — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), as well as Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. Netanyahu said the meetings occurred “because I believe that strengthening the bipartisan support for Israel is a basic foundation of our foreign policy.” 

Netanyahu noted that even amid tension with the Obama administration, Israel and the U.S. signed a record $38 billion memorandum of understanding of security assistance. “That’s how a prime minister in Israel must act,” he said. “Not by submitting or groveling and also not arrogantly but with the wisdom, courage, dignity of a person who fights for his people, for his land and for his country.”

Shimrit Meir, an Israeli analyst and commentator, told JI that Netanyahu’s defense “was mainly about domestic politics at the moment.” According to Meir, Netanyahu needs to position himself as “a strong experienced prime minister” who is able to handle relations with the U.S. regardless of which party controls the White House. 

Meir noted that while Netanyahu speaks perfect English, “I don’t think he speaks their language.” 

Klein Halevi concurred: “Bibi has burned most bridges with the Democrats.”

As the Trump administration reportedly nears a deal to sell F-35 fighter jets to the United Arab Emirates, a group of Democratic and Republican members of Congress are reaffirming their commitment to Israel maintaining its qualitative military edge (QME).

On Friday, Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) introduced a bill, with 17 cosponsors, reaffirming U.S. support for Israel’s QME and adding new requirements, including mandating the president consult with Israeli government officials before making any arms sales in the Middle East that could affect the QME. The bill’s cosponsors include Reps. Ted Deutch (D-FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL). Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who is vying for chairmanship of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is also a cosponsor.

The bill would also require the president to submit an assessment to Congress of the impact such a deal would have on Israel’s QME within 60 days of notifying Congress of a Middle East arms deal. 

While Schneider’s bill does not specifically mention the F-35 sale to the UAE, he stressed to Jewish Insider that the issue was the impetus for the legislation.

“I thought it was important to reiterate that the United States has a commitment to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge,” Schneider told JI. “God willing, there’ll be peace, not just with the UAE and Bahrain, but with all of Israel’s Arab neighbors. That doesn’t change the fact that Israel always needs to have that qualitative military advantage, because things change. Just look at Turkey.”

Although House Democrats have been more vocal in their opposition to the F-35 sale, Schneider believes that support for Israel remains bipartisan.

“I think that’s reflected in the fact that this was a bill introduced with Republican and Democratic support,” he said. “And I have no doubt that my Republican colleagues are just as committed to Israel’s security as my Democratic colleagues.”

Schneider added that he is concerned that an F-35 sale to the UAE would create a precedent and lead other Arab nations to seek the aircraft as well.

“We’ll look for the president to take whatever steps necessary to comply with the law and protect our ally,” Schneider said.

United Arab Emirates Chief Rabbi Yehuda Sarna predicted during a Jewish Insider webcast yesterday that the small Jewish community in Dubai and Abu Dhabi could soon number in the thousands.

“It would not surprise me if in a number of years, if we’re not looking at 1,000 Jews in the UAE, but we’re looking at something closer to 10,000 — and we’re looking at hundreds of thousands of Israeli and Jewish tourists a year,” Sarna said.

When Sarna was named the inaugural chief rabbi of the UAE in March 2019, the announcement made waves around the world. But, said UAE Ambassador to the United Nations Lana Nusseibeh during the JI virtual event, the appointment marked an important moment in relations between Israel and the UAE, and more broadly, between Jews and Muslims across the globe. 

“I think what it demonstrated to colleagues at the U.N. is that this is what is at stake in our work every day in multilateral diplomacy and these agreements that we sign, that ultimately they are about the people-to-people connection,” Nusseibeh said.

Sarna first visited the UAE after New York University — where he has served as a university chaplain since 2002 — opened a campus in Abu Dhabi in 2008.

“When I received the invitation from [then NYU] President John Sexton to come to Abu Dhabi, truth is I’d never heard of it before, I could not have pointed to it on a map and knew nothing of its history or heritage,” Sarna admitted.

“From that first moment when I landed in the airport in Abu Dhabi and was just treated like everyone else, was treated with such a sense of welcoming and hospitality. But [what] it almost immediately did is it began pulling apart my own stereotypes. Even though I had been the one working to combat Islamophobia, nevertheless, there were still remnants, which I had to come to terms with on my own.”

And the recent UAE-Israel peace accord, Sarna said, will have a major global impact.

“I think what we’re looking at is really a tipping point in Muslim-Jewish relations worldwide,” Sarna added. “There is a tremendous, tremendous enthusiasm, curiosity, energy, excitement, about building out not just the political dimensions of the accord, but building out everything else that it’s giving a platform to.”

UAE Ambassador to the United Nations Lana Nusseibeh

Nusseibeh agreed, telling the webcast: “I don’t find it surprising that I spent Yom Kippur yesterday speaking to a synagogue in Rye, [New York].”

Both panelists agreed that the normalization process could serve as a model for future relationships in the region.

“Our foreign minister announced today that we would be seeking election to the U.N. Security Council, the highest body for peace and security,” Nusseibeh shared. “The vote will happen in June next year. And I think it’s an opportunity for us to demonstrate everything that we have been discussing here today about our model, our perspective for the region, a perspective of openness, tolerance, integration, working to find regional solutions.”

Beyond the political and cultural impacts of the normalization agreement, both Nusseibeh and Sarna expressed optimism for the economic opportunities afforded by the normalization of two growing economies. 

“Jews who are living in the UAE came, for the most part, because they feel safe there. And for economic opportunity, whether they’re coming from Europe or South Africa, or the United States, or Canada, or Syria, or Lebanon or Tunisia,” Sarna explained. “With rising antisemitism in several countries, and with economies in certain countries not being as strong, they felt like there was opportunity.”

Nusseibeh echoed that sentiment. “I think, on the people-to-people level, everyone is looking for the opportunities for growth,” she said. “We understand we have a massive youth demographic, we need to provide opportunities for that youth demographic around our region. And we’re looking at ways to innovate startups, AI, and all these other industries.”

“What struck me is that while we’re witnessing a moment and an opportunity,” she continued, “we’re also taking on a responsibility, all of us who witnessed that, who supported that, who thought it was the right step for the region. And I think that responsibility is to make this work, to realize this vision for peace in our region.”

Sarna shared with the webcast that he spent Rosh Hashanah in Abu Dhabi this year. He said he met Israelis who had already moved to the UAE in the weeks since the Abraham Accords were announced. And he believes the free movement between the countries will have a long-lasting effect.

“I think one unforeseen consequence of this is that a deeper engagement between Israelis and Emiratis will actually challenge, for many Israelis, their notion of what does it mean to be Arab,” Sarna concluded. “And I think that will very much have a bit of a moderating effect on the Israeli political spectrum.”

United Arab Emirates Ambassador to the United States Yousef Al Otaiba on Tuesday hailed the Trump administration for working to finalize a normalization agreement between the UAE and Israel, which he said came as a result of Emirati efforts to halt Israel’s planned annexation of parts of the West Bank.

During a Jewish Insider webcast alongside Israeli-American businessman Haim Saban — moderated by former White House deputy national security advisor Dina Powell McCormick — Al Otaiba described the behind-the-scenes efforts that culminated in the groundbreaking Abraham Accords.

One of the first steps in the process, Al Otaiba said, came when he asked Saban to help him publish an op-ed aimed at the Israeli public during the time that annexation was being considered. “Haim told me where it should be placed, when it should be placed and, the most important piece of advice on this was, you have to do it in Hebrew,” the ambassador said. “If you really want to speak to the Israelis, it has to be translated in Hebrew.”

“I remember a subsequent conversation with [Saban], asking, ‘Hey, do you think this article made an impact?’” Al Otaiba recalled. “He started laughing at me, like laughing loudly. He’s like, ‘You have no idea how much impact this article had.’ And it was shortly after the article we then started thinking of actual concrete ideas to avoid annexation.”

Al Otaiba said he remembered “having a really serious conversation with [White House Mideast peace envoy] Avi Berkowitz on July 2, right after he returned from Israel, and figuring out what we can do to prevent [annexation], how do we trade this? How do we give something better?”

The deal, which was formally signed earlier this month during a ceremony on the White House South Lawn, jump-started the normalization of relations between the two countries in exchange for Israel’s commitment to shelve a planned annexation of West Bank territory.

The panelists noted that while the threat of annexation may have brought the sides to the negotiating table, there was little doubt that the larger threat posed by Iran was also a driving force. “There is no question that when you have a common enemy that is, basically, a cancer in the region, you unite forces against that enemy,” remarked Saban, who explained that “people have realized that there is much more upside, aligning with Israel, and forming a front against Iran.”

Both Saban and Al Otaiba credited U.S. leadership for helping to manage the negotiation process and deliver on the agreements. “I think the United States government came through every single time,” Al Otaiba said. “And that’s the reason we had the signing ceremony two weeks ago at the White House.”

The Emirati ambassador lauded Berkowitz, Jared Kushner and Brig. Gen. Miguel Correa for their efforts. “I spoke and talked to them and met with them, probably more in that four weeks than I did with anybody else, including my own family. If it wasn’t for them, I’m not sure this deal would be done,” Al Otaiba said, adding: “for anything like this to happen, it takes an incredible amount of trust.”

Saban, a longtime donor to Democratic candidates and causes, including the presidential campaign of former Vice President Joe Biden, also praised Kushner, Al Otaiba, UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah Bin Zayed, Emirati Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Zayed and Mossad director Yossi Cohen for paving the way for the deal. The Israeli-American businessman called the agreement “game-changing,” explaining: “There was no precedent for public commitment to normalization… Israelis would give their right arm to have peace with all its Arab neighbors.”

Al Otaiba echoed a similar interest in bilateral peace on the Emirati side, telling the webcast: “People always think we do not pay attention to public opinion inside the Emirates because we’re not a democracy. And it’s actually quite the opposite. Because we’re not a democracy, we have to be very in tune with what our people want, and what the streets feel. And people really wanted this. This is not something that we are forcing against the popular will of the parties that live in the country. There is a genuine energy, that people are excited about this.”

The three participants also sought to emphasize the economic benefits of the recent agreement.

Powell McCormick, who serves on Goldman Sachs’s management committee, noted that “we’re already having clients call us and ask about investment opportunities.”

Al Otaiba said he thinks “people forget about the immediate benefits that we’re going to have once you have direct commercial flights and tourism, about trade, investment, research, development, COVID research.” The ambassador added: “It is not a coincidence that when Jared Kushner came from Tel Aviv to Abu Dhabi on that historic flight, the first set of MOUs that we submitted to the United States to get done were on consular affairs, civil aviation, trade, prevention of double taxation, protection of investments — what we feel is the foundation, the infrastructure for any healthy relationship, so we can have mutual wins, so you can have trade investment R&D.”

Saban said at least five Israeli entrepreneurs have reached out to him with ideas to invest in the UAE. “Even my chief investment officer and the head of my VC division, they came to me and they said, ‘We have an idea that we can do with the Emiratis.’”

Al Otaiba noted how much has already occurred in just the few weeks since the accord was announced.

“We’ve already seen MOUs on AI, on COVID research, on health care and just today, a very prominent soccer club in Dubai bought an Israeli soccer player,” he noted. “Once an Emirati investor feels that he can invest in Israel safely, and an Israeli investor feels that he can invest in the UAE safely and not get taxed twice… I think the stars are the limit.”

Following the historic signing of the Abraham Accords earlier this week, Jewish Insider will be hosting a pair of back-to-back panel discussions featuring leaders from the United Arab Emirates in conversation with other top JI readers. 

On September 29 at 1 p.m. ET, hear from Ambassador of the United Arab Emirates Yousef Al Otaiba in conversation with business leader Haim Saban and Dina Powell McCormick, the former U.S. deputy national security director, on how the peace agreement between Israel and the UAE came to be. 

Al Otaiba has met with a number of Jewish organizations in recent weeks, including several in the last few days, but this event will be his first public conversation with a largely Jewish audience. Saban, a close friend of Al Otaiba and UAE Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed, is credited with helping broker the normalization agreement between Israel and the UAE and encouraging Al Otaiba to write a groundbreaking op-ed in an Israeli newspaper earlier this year. 

Ambassador Lana Zaki Nusseibeh has served as the Emirates’ representative at the United Nations since 2013. Nusseibeh holds a masters degree in Israeli and Jewish Diaspora Studies from the University of London. Earlier this year, Nusseibeh addressed an American Jewish Committee webcast on combating the coronavirus. For this conversation, she’ll be joined by Rabbi Yehuda Sarna, the inaugural chief rabbi of the UAE, to discuss the growing relationship between the UAE and the Jewish community, both locally and around the world. 

Spots are limited, so register now through the form below.

(Contact [email protected] with any questions or issues.)

President Donald Trump implored American Jewish leaders to back his administration’s efforts to bring peace in the Middle East and support his reelection bid during an annual High Holidays conference call with rabbis and Jewish community leaders on Wednesday afternoon. 

“Whatever you can do in terms of November 3rd, it’s going to be very important because if we don’t win, Israel is in big trouble,” Trump told participants on the call, adding that if he loses reelection and Republicans lose control of the Senate, “you are going to lose control of Israel. Israel will never be the same. I don’t know if it can recover from that.” 

Trump noted the previous lack of widespread support among Jewish voters for his campaign, saying he was surprised to have only received 25% of the Jewish vote in 2016. “Here I have a son-in-law and a daughter who are Jewish, I have beautiful grandchildren that are Jewish, I have all of these incredible achievements,”” he said. “I’m amazed that it seems to be almost automatically a Democrat vote. President Obama is the worst president, I would say by far, that Israel has ever had in the United States… And yet the Democrats get 75%.”

“I hope you can do better with that,” Trump continued. “I hope you could explain to people what’s going on. We have to get more support from the Jewish people — for Israel… We have to be able, to hopefully, do well on November 3, and I hope you can get everybody out there. Otherwise, everything that we’ve done, I think, could come undone and we wouldn’t like that.”

On the call, White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner touted the administration’s record. “I can honestly say that there’s been no greater president for the Jewish people in history than Donald Trump,” Kushner said.

Trump ended the call by saying, “We really appreciate you. We love your country also.”

In Sarah Huckabee Sanders’s new book, Speaking for Myself: Faith, Freedom, and the Fight of Our Lives Inside the Trump White House, the former White House press secretary describes her relationship with her former colleague Josh Raffel, whose White House communications responsibilities included the Israeli-Palestinian file.

“Josh and I hadn’t known each other before starting in the White House. He was a liberal, aggressive, foulmouthed Jew from New York City who had spent most of his career working in Hollywood. I was pretty much his total opposite,” Sanders writes in the book, obtained by Jewish Insider, in a chapter detailing what happened behind the scenes of President Donald Trump’s first visit to Saudi Arabia in 2017.  

Raffel, who also served as a spokesperson for Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, was senior vice president at Hiltzik Strategies and head of public relations at Blumhouse Productions before joining the Trump administration in 2017. He left the White House in the spring of 2018.

Sanders writes that “despite our differences, I had grown to love Josh. He is one of the funniest people I know, intensely loyal, and probably the most talented communications strategist I’ve ever worked with. Nobody in the White House could work a story better than Josh, and he was always one of the first colleagues I turned to for help on the toughest assignments.” 

Raffel told JI that Sanders “is a close friend.” 

In the book, Sanders also describes her close relationship with Ivanka. “When I was home sick with strep throat and high fever Ivanka had matzo ball soup sent over from her favorite deli,” she writes.

White House Mideast peace envoy Avi Berkowitz had the honor of posting President Donald Trump’s tweet announcing a groundbreaking normalization agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates last Thursday, White House senior advisor Jared Kushner revealed in an interview published on Wednesday. 

“[Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications] Dan Scavino was sitting in the back, and he let Avi push the button,” Kushner detailed in an interview with Ami Magazine, a weekly print-only publication widely read in the Orthodox community. “Avi has been working around the clock, and it’s really an incredible deal. He did a great job, so we all thought it would be an honor for him to do that.”

The presidential tweet came after a 15-minute phone call between Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Emirati Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed. “HUGE breakthrough today! Historic Peace Agreement between our two GREAT friends, Israel and the United Arab Emirates!” A follow up tweet by Trump read. 

Kushner shared with the publication what went on behind the scenes in the Oval Office ahead of Trump’s public statement: “We made the call in the Oval Office with a bunch of people on our team who wanted to be there. After we hung up, everyone in the room started to applaud. Then the president stood up and started clapping too, because he realized that we were all clapping for peace. As we were getting ready to bring in the media, we sent out the tweet which was all set up and ready to go. Dan Scavino was sitting in the back and Avi pushed the button. Then we brought the press in and shared what had happened with the world.”

The White House senior advisor noted that this was the first time Trump had given someone from his wider team the permission to tweet out from his account. “The president never lets anyone do it. It’s always either the president or Dan [Scavino],” Kushner noted. 

Berkowitz and U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman also spoke to Ami, which featured them on the front cover as “the peacemakers.” 

The two seemed to offer differing views on the shelving of Netanyahu’s annexation plan as part of the U.A.E.-Israel accord. “The application of sovereignty to areas of the West Bank is something that our vision for peace accommodates, as we don’t fundamentally disagree with it,” Berkowitz told the magazine. “We believe that for the next few months it’s worthwhile to continue advancing the cause of peace and suspend the discussion about what the application of sovereignty and recognition by the United States would look like. We were in the middle of those discussions, and quite honestly we would still have some work to do should that path be opened up in the future.” 

The administration official suggested that Netanyahu “understands the historic achievement” of shifting gears away from his plan to annex parts of the West Bank and take the route of peace with the Arab world and “that for the foreseeable future the Israeli people are going to be excited about following that path.” 

Friedman, however, noted that the deal “doesn’t require that the sovereignty efforts that have begun be reversed. They’re just going to be delayed a little bit… We were on the path of support for the application of sovereignty to the settlements, and we were certainly moving along that path, when this opportunity came along. We had the intellectual flexibility to say, ‘Let’s shift gears a bit, because this is better.’” 

The ambassador also expressed his dismay at the ongoing political crisis in Israel. “The unity government hasn’t really created the unity I would have hoped for,” Friedman explained. “Jewish unity around the world is important, and Jewish unity within Israel is very important. I think we are still challenged in that regard, and because those political currents are still working their way through the system, those who see political advantages or disadvantages to making strong statements will continue to do so.”

This post has been updated to clarify Ambassador Friedman’s remarks on Israel’s political crisis.

Longtime Palestinian activists expressed their disappointment at the language in the Israel plank of the 2020 Democratic National Committee platform during a webinar hosted by the Arab American Institute on Tuesday.

James Zogby, AAI’s president, who has been involved in the drafting process of the party’s platform for decades, said this year’s process was markedly more friendly to Palestinian activists and their supporters than in prior election cycles, but still expressed frustration that the 2020 platform did not reference “occupation,” condemn all Israeli settlements or support conditioning U.S. aid to Israel.

Zogby accused party leaders of caving to pressure from the pro-Israel community for political reasons. “It’s not about policy, ever. It’s really about politics,” he asserted. “And it’s sort of a power pull. It’s a question of who can make who jump through hoops… We were always on the downside of that debate. In this case, they did it again, they wouldn’t let those words in the platform just to show who’s boss.”

Zaha Hassan, a human rights lawyer and visiting fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, called this year’s platform drafting process “difficult to understand” and “not very transparent,” adding that Palestinian-American delegates were disappointed with the results. She also decried the party for failing to explicitly support “equality” between Israelis and Palestinians, not using the word “sovereignty” in discussing Palestinian statehood and including language calling for Israel to remain a Jewish state.

Zogby praised the platform’s language regarding the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which says the party opposes “any effort to unfairly single out and delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement, while protecting the constitutional right of our citizens to free speech.” Zogby said he sees the second clause as essentially nullifying the previous anti-BDS language and as a disavowal of the state-level anti-BDS legislation that has been adopted by 30 states.

Jewish Currents editor-at-large Peter Beinart, who recently sent shockwaves through the Jewish community with a column arguing that liberal Zionists should abandon hope for a two-state solution, claimed that there is no longer a viable argument in support of Israel from a Democratic perspective.

“One of the things that I think we see more and more clearly is it’s not really possible to cordon off the Israel-Palestinian debate from all of the other debates… People have a set of values and principles,” he said. “In the Republican Party that is not such a problem because those principles fundamentally are not about equality.”

“But in the Democratic Party,” he continued, “the move that people who want the United States to support the Israeli government… is essentially to kind of cordon off, or try to defend the Israeli policies in the language of progressivism, which really doesn’t work when you have a government that’s denying millions of people basic rights because of their ethno-religious status.”

Hassan noted that the platform does not use language seen in previous platforms about “shared values” between the U.S. and Israel — recognition, she said, of this dynamic.

Beinart partly blamed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government for this shift.

“We’ve had an Israeli prime minister now for 11 years who is very American, and who often looks to many progressive Americans as a kind of Israeli version of the Republicans that we like least domestically,” he said. “That makes it so easy for Americans to understand why the values that he represents are so anathema to us.”

Despite his criticisms of the platform, Zogby went on to downplay its significance, noting that it often does not reflect how the party, and its members, actually behave in practice.

“I dare say most people never even read the damn thing after it’s done,” he said. “Secondly, I think it’s important to see that the platform is never adhered to even by Democratic administrations… So I’m not going to make much right now of where [Joe] Biden and [Kamala] Harris are going to be.”

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, who was elected in 2018 as the state’s first Jewish governor, celebrated the increasing number of Jewish Americans involved in politics, with some rising through the ranks of the Democratic Party. 

“It is very heartening to see the increasing visibility of Jewish Americans throughout politics,” Polis said during a virtual event on Tuesday for Jewish Democrats hosted by the Democratic National Committee during the 2020 Democratic National Convention. “This year, several of the candidates for president of the United States were of Jewish heritage. And of course, with the selection of [Sen.] Kamala Harris, our soon-to-be second gentleman of the U.S., Douglas Emhoff, is Jewish.”

Polis noted Emhoff’s possible role is “another reason” why Joe Biden’s selection of Harris as his running mate “was not just outstanding, but, frankly, groundbreaking.” 

“These are milestones and speak well of the inclusive nature of our nation and of the Democratic Party,” said the Colorado Democrat. 

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who participated in a follow-up panel focused on American Jewish voters, said he was deeply moved to watch “a Jew named Bernie Sanders give, I think, the most enthusiastic speech about a nominee in the nomination that he competed for and came in second place, of any second-place finisher I’ve ever heard.” 

On the webcast, Polis also highlighted President Donald Trump’s comments on the campaign trail on Monday, suggesting that he “moved the capital of Israel to Jerusalem… for the evangelicals.” 

“For once, President Trump was honest about his motives. It wasn’t because of a belief that Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Israel. It wasn’t because of any deeply held belief in the Jewish state. It was simply what he said it was: an appeal to evangelical voters,” Polis stressed. “I have friends on both sides of when or how, or if the embassy should be moved. But it should not be moved — I think we would all agree — simply because evangelical voters in America want it. It should be situated because of where we can best support the peace process, the stability and survival of the Jewish State of Israel.”

In a bipartisan effort to ease decades of tensions between Israel and Arab states, Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Rob Portman (R-OH) introduced legislation on Thursday that would require the State Department to provide an accounting of countries that punish individuals for engaging with Israel.

The bill, “Strengthening Reporting of Actions Taken Against the Normalization of Relations with Israel Act of 2020” would require the State Department to include a status report on anti-normalization laws in countries covered by the department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in its annual Report on Human Rights Practices. The requirement would run from 2021 to 2026.

(Read the full text of the bill, S.4482 – “Strengthening Reporting of Actions Taken Against the Normalization of Relations with Israel Act of 2020”.)

The legislation includes a provision stating that the Arab League “has maintained an official boycott of Israeli companies and Israeli-made goods since the founding of Israel in 1948.”

A number of Arab countries have laws punishing citizens for interacting with Israeli citizens and businesses. The Arab League first issued a formal boycott of Jewish businesses in 1945, three years prior to the formation of Israel. Afterwards, the League modified the ban to include secondary businesses affiliated or trading with Israel.

In a statement to Jewish Insider, Portman said, “I am proud to join Senator Booker on this bipartisan legislation which supports our ally Israel and the longstanding US policy that encourages Arab League states to normalize their relations with Israel.”

“Anti-normalization laws in the region continue to be a barrier toward communities, people, NGOs and business coming together. In my visits to the region, I’ve seen the deep and abiding friendships that exist, and they are essential to building a long term peace,” Portman continued. “This bill will discourage those Arab League states that continue to enforce anti-normalization laws and support efforts like those proposed by the Arab Council that encourage and defend community engagement amongst Arabs and Israelis.”

“Since my time in the Senate, I have consistently supported Arab-Israeli engagement,” Booker said in a statement. “The need for people-to-people engagement between these communities is not only a critical tool for diplomacy but also important for peace and economic prosperity in the region. Our bill will strengthen America’s commitment to pursuing peace by supporting and encouraging dialogue between Arab and Israeli citizens.”

The bill cites a number of organizations and groups working in support of normalizing relations. 

The Arab Council for Regional Integration, one group praised in the bill, applauded Sens. Booker and Portman for sponsoring the legislation. “We are gratified that at a time of turmoil around the world, two prominent U.S. Senators have decided to stand with advocates of people-to-people engagement between Arabs and Israelis,” Arab Council co-founder Mostafa El-Dessouki told JI. “Civil society has always been the ‘missing piece’ in efforts to forge a just and lasting peace in our region. This bill will empower the many bridge-builders among us to move forward toward a ‘peace between peoples.’”

On Sunday, the leadership for the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organization released a statement praising Portman and Booker. “This bipartisan measure takes action against [anti-normalization] policies and promotes the process of further regional normalization with Israel, which is critical to achieving a genuine and lasting peace between the Jewish state and its Arab neighbors.”

Dani Dayan didn’t envision ending his four-year term as Israel’s consul general in New York with a series of Zoom calls. Since becoming Israel’s chief diplomat in the Big Apple in the summer of 2016, Dayan could often be spotted at Jewish events across the city and was a frequent visitor to nearby states. Over the past two months, due to coronavirus-imposed restrictions, Dayan worked the phones to assist with matters related to the virus and participated in dozens of Zoom calls to bid farewell to the Jewish organizations, members of Congress and other groups with whom he has built close ties during his tenure. 

In a Zoom call with Jewish Insider days before his departure, Dayan described his final months in office and the virtual goodbye parties as “bittersweet.”

“I feel like I was riding a train at 300 miles per hour and suddenly someone pulled the brakes,” he said about the last few months of his posting. “It prevented me from bidding farewell to the city and to the area.”

As someone who made an effort to immediately visit the scenes of antisemitic attacks and console the community in times of grief, Dayan said it was “extremely frustrating” not to be able to physically show solidarity with the Jewish community heavily affected by the coronavirus. “It was a sad and frustrating period,” he told JI. 

Despite that, the first-time diplomat, who previously served as chairman of the Yesha Council, an umbrella organization of Jewish West Bank settlements, said he leaves satisfied and believes he had made “a positive difference” in the role he served. 

Dayan was two years into his posting when a domestic terrorist interrupted Shabbat morning services at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, killing 11 congregants. Dayan traveled to Pittsburgh to offer support to the community shortly afterward. “When I was nominated [to be consul general], it was clear for me that a large part of my activity will be related to the Jewish community,” he said. “But in my worst nightmares I didn’t expect that antisemitism would take such a large and important part of my time.” 

Dayan described the Pittsburgh shooting as the most significant moment of his term. Prior events — including the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va. and cemetery desecrations across the U.S. — had shown Dayan the dangers of extremism in the U.S. “But nothing prepared me for Pittsburgh,” he said. “This was something that I couldn’t imagine I would experience in this country.” 

Dayan said that, for the first time, he is worried about American Jewry. “I must admit that I sometimes thought that antisemitism is mainly a fundraising tool for Jewish organizations. But I was wrong. It is real and we have to be extremely attentive to the issue,” he explained. 

Months after Dayan arrived in New York, Donald Trump was elected president. Dayan described the U.S.-Israel relationship as “extremely strong” under Trump, but noted that his job — as Israel’s representative in a Democratic-controlled state — became more challenging. “I remember on election night in 2016, it was clear to me that the job of my colleague, Ron Dermer, in Washington became easier and my job in New York became more difficult,” he told JI. 

Still, Dayan said he refuses to “share the doomsday scenarios” often expressed by pundits and community leaders that Israel might cease to be a bipartisan issue in the U.S. “I long ago realized that the positions of Americans towards Israel are more influenced by socio-political current events than by what Israel does or does not do,” he opined. ”In many instances, I see the signs of domestic politics having nothing to do with the issue itself or with Israel itself.”

Pointing to the recent Democratic primary for New York’s 15th congressional district in the South Bronx, where, despite a small Jewish population, five of the leading six candidates — including winner Ritchie Torres — were vocally pro-Israel, Dayan argued that ”the stance for retaining Israel as bipartisan is a winnable one.” 

As for his own political ambitions, Dayan told JI he has no concrete plans for his next endeavor — after he completes his mandatory 14-day quarantine at his home in Ma’ale Shomron. “All the good things in my life happened by surprise, including this position,” he said. Dayan, who joined the Likud Party after an attempted run for the Knesset on the Bayit Yehudi slate in the 2015 elections, was initially tapped by Netanyahu to become Israel’s ambassador to Brazil, but was rejected by the Brazilian government.

“In some sense, I return to Israel the same person I arrived here,” Dayan said. “In some sense I changed because my commitment to the bond between Israel and American Jewry is much stronger now than it was when I came here. I assume I will be involved in those matters.” But Dayan said he’s not sure he’s ready to run for office given the current political climate. “But I assume that I will probably be in a position of influence on the matters that I cherish.” 

As for another diplomatic position, Dayan said there aren’t many opportunities left for him given that the positions that he would aspire to — such as Washington, London, and the U.N. — have recently been filled. 

“I won’t miss New York,” Dayan concluded the Zoom call on Tuesday. “But I will miss New Yorkers.”

A group of 41 Israeli former senior security officials have sent a letter of appreciation to Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Ted Deutch (D-FL) and David Price (D-NC), the authors of a letter signed by 191 House members and sent to Israeli leaders expressing opposition to annexation.

“We commend you on building such a broad coalition of Members of Congress to join you in signing this letter,” the Israeli officials wrote in a letter sent to congressional offices Monday and obtained by Jewish Insider. “We consider it a further manifestation of the broad-based support for the kind of Israel we have fought for on the battlefield and continue to strive for, one that is strong and safe, maintains a solid Jewish majority for generations to come, all while upholding the values of democracy and equality as enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.” 

The signatories include former Mossad chiefs Tamir Pardo, Danny Yatom and Shabtai Shavit; former Shin Bet heads Ami Ayalon and Yaakov Peri; former Deputy Defense Minister Efraim Sneh, and former top IDF officials. Many of the signatories sent a similar letter to Congress last year expressing appreciation for the passage of H. Res. 246, which affirmed “strong support for a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resulting in two states.”

The former officials indirectly referenced a letter sent by 12 progressive Democrats threatening to condition aid to Israel if the government moves forward with a plan to annex portions of the West Bank. “Any perceived erosion, however misconstrued, in these relations and in the ironclad U.S. commitment to the durability of security assistance risks undermining our deterrence,” they wrote in the letter.

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

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

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

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

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

A group of Democratic House members are collecting signatures for a letter cautioning Israeli leaders against unilaterally annexing portions of the West Bank. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that the government could begin annexing territory as early as July 1, though efforts to finalize a plan have stalled in recent days.

The letter, authored by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Ted Deutch (D-FL) and David Price (D-NC), and shared with Jewish Insider, warns Netanyahu and Defense Minister Benny Gantz that annexation is likely to jeopardize Israel’s warming ties with Gulf states, put Jordan’s security at risk and complicate Israel’s relationships in European countries and around the world. “We do not see how any of these acute risks serve the long-term interest of a strong, secure Israel,” the Democratic lawmakers write. 

The letter was distributed to members of the Demcoratic caucus on Monday. JTA first reported the content of the letter. 

Earlier this month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) warned that unilateral Israeli annexation “puts the future [of peace] at risk and undermines our national security interest and decades of bipartisan policy.”

A similar letter from Democratic Senators garnered 19 signatures. The text of the letter, which was updated several times before being sent, cautioned the new Israeli government that “unilateral annexation puts both Israel’s security and democracy at risk” and “would have a clear impact on Israel’s future and our vital bilateral and bipartisan relationship.” Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Bob Casey (D-PA) and Tina Smith (D-MN) sent individual communiques to Netanyahu and Gantz, similarly opposing the move. Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) addressed the matter in individual letters to Pompeo. 

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) sent a letter echoing those sentiments to President Donald Trump on Tuesday. “In recent months, your Administration appears to have given a green light to unilateral annexation, despite the risks to peace and Israel’s security and democracy,” the California senator wrote. Harris suggested that annexation “not only risks Israel’s security, but would also call into question this Israeli Government’s commitment to shared values of democracy and self-determination.” 

In the House letter, the lawmakers implore the Israeli government, “as committed partners in supporting and protecting the special U.S.-Israel relationship,” to “reconsider” annexation plans before the target date. “We have consistently endorsed the pursuit of a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians resulting in two states for two peoples and a brighter future for the Israeli people and the Palestinian people. In that vein, we write today to express our deep concern that the push for unilateral annexation of territory in the West Bank after July 1st will make these goals harder to achieve,” the letter reads. 

Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) told JI in a recent interview that she would be open to signing such a letter. “While I do not generally believe that strict red lines aid the overriding effort towards a two-state solution, I do believe that there are some issues that have become so politically polarized that they risk politicizing the overall U.S.-Israeli relationship to the detriment of both nations,” Clarke explained. 

Below is the full letter: 

To:

Prime Minister Netanyahu

Alternate Prime Minister and Defense Minister Gantz

Foreign Minister Ashkenazi

We write as American lawmakers who are long-time supporters, based on our shared democratic values and strategic interests, of Israel and the U.S.-Israel relationship. We firmly believe in, and advocate for, a strong and secure Jewish and democratic State of Israel, a state able to build upon current peace treaties and expand cooperation with regional players and the international community. We have consistently endorsed the pursuit of a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians resulting in two states for two peoples and a brighter future for the Israeli people and the Palestinian people. In that vein, we write today to express our deep concern that the push for unilateral annexation of territory in the West Bank after July 1st will make these goals harder to achieve.

Longstanding, bipartisan U.S. foreign policy supports direct negotiations to achieve a viable two-state solution that addresses the aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians, and their desire for long-term security and a just, sustainable peace. This position was twice reconfirmed by the U.S. House of Representatives last year. Our fear is that unilateral actions, taken by either side, will push the parties further from negotiations and the possibility of a final, negotiated agreement.  

We remain steadfast in our belief that pursuing two states for two peoples is essential to ensuring a secure, Jewish, democratic Israel able to live side-by-side, in peace and mutual recognition, with an independent, viable, de-militarized Palestinian state.

Unilateral annexation would likely jeopardize Israel’s significant progress on normalization with Arab states at a time when closer cooperation can contribute to countering shared threats.  Unilateral annexation risks insecurity in Jordan, with serious ancillary risks to Israel. Finally, unilateral annexation could create serious problems for Israel with its European friends and other partners around the world. We do not see how any of these acute risks serve the long-term interest of a strong, secure Israel.

As committed partners in supporting and protecting the special U.S.-Israel relationship, we express our deep concern with the stated intention to move ahead with any unilateral annexation of West Bank territory, and we urge your government to reconsider plans to do so.

As a new employee of the Maccabee Task Force, an organization that fights BDS on college campuses, Marvel Joseph is responsible for connecting with students at historically black colleges and universities. Joseph’s goal, he told Jewish Insider, is “bridging the gap between the black community and Israel.” The recent college graduate is up for the task — he was an outspoken AIPAC activist at Florida Atlantic University (FAU), and a prominent black voice in the college’s pro-Israel scene.

But following George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police officers last month, Joseph, the son of Haitian immigrants, has found himself in an unfamiliar role: teaching Jewish communities about racism. He has participated in recent Zoom webinars with different Jewish communities — including an Orthodox synagogue and his alma mater’s Hillel — about the ongoing protests. In recent weeks he has discussed fighting police brutality with rabbis, Jewish nonprofit professionals and other Israel advocates he has gotten to know since he first got involved in the pro-Israel space in 2018. 

“This is the first time that I’ve really been able to say, ‘This is what it’s like being black,’” Joseph explained. “Never before in my entire time as a pro-Israel advocate or pro-Israel leader… have I ever had the opportunity, necessarily, to really stand up and say, ‘This is what my community is going through.’”

Since he attended a 2018 retreat hosted by AIPAC for African-American students, Joseph has placed Israel advocacy at the forefront of his personal and professional endeavors. He has interned at AIPAC, traveled to Israel four times and developed relationships in the Jewish community. Now, for the first time, he is asking the friends he made there to show up for him — and he has found a largely receptive audience. 

“What I’m hoping comes out of all of this, when it’s all said and done, is that in the same way that we have black activists in the pro-Israel movement, I hope we also get strong Jewish activists in the pro-black community and the black lives matter movement,” Joseph said. 

Joseph, who is Christian, is used to being in Jewish spaces, having grown up and attended school in Boca Raton, Florida. In 2010, when a major earthquake rocked his parents’ native Haiti, many of his Jewish friends joined together to raise relief funds for Haitians. That memory of “Jewish kids helping me” has stayed with Joseph. 

As a child, he identified more with the Haitian community than with the broader African-American community in south Florida. “Growing up from immigrant parents as opposed to growing up from a family of descendants of African-American slaves… there’s a different starting point,” Joseph said. Unlike some of his friends whose families were affected by violent, racially tinged events, his parents started fresh in America in the 1980s. 

Even in the mostly white spaces he was accustomed to, Joseph didn’t think much about racism. “The schools that [my parents] put me in, even though I was the only black person there, I didn’t feel any different than anyone else, because my background, my culture, always revolved around being Haitian, not around being black in America,” Joseph said. 

That changed when he started college. At a fraternity party freshman year with a white friend from home, the friend turned to him, saying, “‘Dude, I’m so glad that you’re not like these other n*****s,’” Joseph recalled. “I was like, ‘What?’ And he’s like, ‘Yeah, you’re one of the good ones,’” Joseph said. “It didn’t matter anything else that happened years before… to him I was just a good n****r,” Joseph added.

The encounter at the party set him on a quest to “find out what my real identity was,” he said. Joseph began reading black authors like James Baldwin, whose quote “to be black and conscious in America is to be in a constant state of rage,” inspired his journey toward better understanding systemic racism in the United States. 

Marvel Joseph leads a Maccabee Task Force trip to Israel for black student leaders in December. (Courtesy)

Still, Joseph’s Haitian background is a key part of his identity, and it’s what inspired his connection to Israel. He has only been to Haiti once, on a three-day visit in 2019, which he described as the most meaningful trip of his life. “It was the first time when I walked into a place I didn’t feel out of place. I got to actually be part of my people,” Joseph explained. “Probably how a lot of Jewish people feel when they get to go to Israel.” That shared feeling of being part of a diaspora, and having a homeland, drew him toward Israel. 

Joseph has built a niche for himself in the pro-Israel world, as a Christian and a Haitian who speaks about his deep connection to the Jewish state. But he told Jewish Insider that he never felt like “the token black person in the pro-Israel movement.” The reason, Joseph said, is that “when you’re tokenized, you say what they tell you to say and not what you believe. Everything I say is stuff that I believe.” 

As he sees it, many Jewish organizations — including some right-leaning ones who might not otherwise host discussions about racism — are reaching out to him now “because they realized that this is someone who stands up for [the Jewish community] in ways that no one prior has.” 

Joseph understands that it’s unusual for a black person who is not Jewish to pursue a career in what is largely a Jewish cause. “We love talking about MLK being the ultimate black Zionist, but MLK had other things that he was worried about,” Joseph said, adding, “I’ve essentially dedicated my first year out of school, at least my first year out of school, to really doing this work.”

So what does Joseph hope to see from his Jewish friends? “My response to people when they say, ‘Hey, we’re thinking about you during this time,’ is, ‘Well hey, call your congressman, tell them you’re thinking about me and all the black people that have been killed.’” 

AIPAC, which sent a letter to its African-American members six days after Floyd’s death expressing solidarity, received criticism for being slow to issue a public statement in response to the events, but Joseph wasn’t concerned by that. What mattered more was the messages of support he received from friends at AIPAC and in the pro-Israel community, people who asked him how they could support him and the cause. “It’s a bipartisan organization… the fact that people decided that whether this is a partisan issue or not, I support you and your community, not because of everything you’ve done for me but because it’s the right thing to do, to me means more than any statement,” Joseph explained.

He views his position in the Jewish community as a bridge-builder, someone who supports Israel and fights antisemitism but also helps “my friends in the Jewish community understand that there’s a world outside of just the Jewish issues.” He understands that the anti-Israel policies in the official Black Lives Matter platform give some Jews pause. “But the idea of ‘black lives matter’ is black lives matter. There’s other ways to support a community,” Joseph said.

“At the end of this,” Joseph explained, he hopes to see “more education and a more genuine partnership, not an ‘I scratch your back, you scratch mine,’ but a ‘please tell me how I can help.’”

Minnesota Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Tina Smith (D-MN) have joined more than two dozen Senate Democrats publicly warning Israeli leaders of the implications of efforts to unilaterally annex portions of the West Bank. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that the government could start annexing territory as early as July 1.

In individual letters sent last month and made public over the weekend, both senators — Klobuchar addressed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Smith wrote to Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz — posited that annexation would undermine efforts to attain a two-state solution.

Twenty-eight senators have so far spoken out against the annexation proposal.

Last month, 19 Democratic senators sent a letter to Netanyahu and Gantz urging the Israeli leaders not to move forward with the effort. That letter, which was updated several times before being sent, cautioned the new Israeli government that “unilateral annexation puts both Israel’s security and democracy at risk” and “would have a clear impact on Israel’s future and our vital bilateral and bipartisan relationship.” Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Bob Casey (D-PA) sent individual communiques to Netanyahu and Gantz, similarly opposing the move, and Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH) addressed the matter in individual letters to Pompeo. 

In addition, Sens. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) issued statements against annexation, and Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) indicated to Jewish Currents that instead of signing or authoring a letter on annexation, he would “communicate directly with [Israeli] Ambassador [Ron] Dermer and Israeli officials to express his concerns.” 

On Monday, eight Senate candidates in battleground states are expected to join the list expressing their strong opposition to such a move. In statements provided to J Street and shared with Jewish Insider, the candidates — Cal Cunningham (North Carolina), Sara Gideon (Maine), Teresa Greenfield (Iowa), Al Gross (Alaska), Jaime Harrison (South Carolina), MJ Hegar (Texas), John Hickenlooper (Colorado), Amy McGrath (Kentucky) and Jon Ossoff (Georgia) — emphasized that annexation would put the future of a two-state solution at risk. 

Read their statements in full here.

Earlier this month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) warned that unilateral annexation “puts the future [of peace] at risk and undermines our national security interest and decades of bipartisan policy.” Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden also came out against annexation, saying it “will choke off any hope for peace.”

“From the presidential nominee to the speaker of the House and from the Senate to the senatorial campaign trail, Democratic leaders have now made absolutely clear that they do not and cannot support unilateral annexation in the West Bank,” J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami told JI. “For annexation to move forward in the face of this overwhelming opposition would be incredibly harmful to the future of Israelis and Palestinians and to the US-Israel relationship.”