Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), facing a runoff special election to succeed the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), has walked a fine line on supporting Israel during his nearly decade in Congress — maintaining strong rhetorical support for the Jewish state while voting against major aid packages and some antisemitism legislation.

Sources with Norman’s campaign and with the campaign of his opponent, Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC), told Jewish Insider that both camps are seeking the pro-Israel vote in the Aug. 25 runoff. Still, the two candidates have taken different approaches to the issue, which are now under the microscope as the race enters its final leg. 

A member of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus, Norman has developed a reputation on Capitol Hill as a committed fiscal hawk known for frequently opposing must-pass items like the debt ceiling increase or government spending packages because they did not address the national debt or include provisions to offset the spending. 

Norman has generally maintained a pro-Israel record since being elected to Congress in 2017. In the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, Norman signed on to several resolutions and letters condemning the attacks and the subsequent anti-Israel protests on university campuses nationwide. 

But Norman also voted against two Israel aid packages in 2024 — he opposed the first bill in February for not containing offsets to cover the financial costs and another bill in April for being tied to Ukraine assistance, which he opposes. 

Norman defended both votes, arguing that neither were indicative of his commitment to the Jewish state and pointing to his support for the Israel aid package that the House passed in November 2023, which included offsets. (That bill stalled in the Senate.)

“There’s NO DISCUSSION about any spending reductions to pay for any of this, so we’re just supposed to borrow more and more money to pay for this aid?” Norman wrote in a blog post of his opposition to the Israel aid package without offsets. “It’s borderline criminal what we’re doing, and it’s sad that the United States is no longer able to help a critical ally because of our own abhorrent financial recklessness.”

Norman repeatedly criticized then-President Joe Biden for his waning support for Israel as the 2024 presidential election drew near, and urged the Trump administration to stand with the Jewish state in its campaign to eliminate Hamas from Gaza.

Norman called the White House’s Gaza peace plan, announced in October, “a step in the right direction and long overdue.” 

“We must continue to stand with Israel, ensure Hamas is fully dismantled, and never forget who the terrorists are in this conflict. This is a win for peace, for strength, and for our greatest ally in the Middle East,” he said.

He voted against the long-stalled Antisemitism Awareness Act (AAA) when it passed the House in May of 2024 and voiced his opposition to any new legislation on the issue of antisemitism the following spring. “We shouldn’t do anything further with antisemitism. I don’t know how you define it. It’s subjective,” Norman told Punchbowl News. 

While Norman was one of just five lawmakers to vote against the Never Again Education Act — a bill to further Holocaust-related programming and educational materials in middle and high schools — when it was passed by the House in 2020, he supported legislation in 2023 reauthorizing the law and extending the program through 2030. 

Representatives for Norman did not respond to JI’s request for comment on his opposition to those bills.

During the GOP debate in the special election primary, Norman pointed to his record of calling out the Iranian regime as a threat to the U.S. The House lawmaker praised the president’s decision to strike Iran, though he argued that the ongoing war “has gone on longer” than expected and said he would not vote to support U.S. troops on the ground.

“There are military generals now that are saying that if we’re going to really eliminate them, they’re gonna have to put boots on the ground. I don’t think the country wants that right now,” he said. “[Trump] will eventually, sooner rather than later, use whatever power from the air to take them out, and I think that’s the right course to take.” 

Norman has been endorsed in the runoff by Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), a pro-Israel champion in Congress. Graham, meanwhile, has the support of Trump and the Republican Jewish Coalition. Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC), who came in third in the special primary election, endorsed Graham in the runoff on Friday. 

Graham’s tenure in public office only began in mid-July, when her late brother’s sudden passing led to her appointment to serve out the rest of his term. The incumbent senator has begun cosponsoring legislation, including on supporting Israel and targeting Iran, in recent weeks in a continuation of her brother’s policy on the issues. 

Graham announced on Thursday that she was cosponsoring an additional four bills, all of which “strengthen the U.S.-Israel partnership, target the Iranian regime and confront antisemitism,” according to a readout from her office. 

All four bills are also bipartisan and bicameral: the U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act, establishing a cooperative initiative focused on defense technology R&D; the Iran Human Rights, Internet Freedom, and Accountability Act, aimed at disrupting the finances of the Iranian regime and its allies and expand internet access in Iran; the Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act, a bill targeting Iran’s oil exports to China and other countries; and the Jewish American Security Act, a proposal to address antisemitism across multiple sectors of American society being championed by the mainstream Jewish community. 

“I truly believe we have a moral and religious duty to stand with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel to guard against those who seek to destroy them,” Darline Graham told JI in a statement. “In dangerous times, it is crucial we strengthen ties with a friend and ally like Israel, not walk away from them.”

At the primary debate, Graham also voiced strong support for the Iran war. 

“I completely agree with President Trump on standing with Israel. They are an extremely important ally of the United States,” Graham said. “We cannot allow terrorists to build nuclear missiles because they’re going to want to kill Americans, that is just the sad truth. If they build the nuclear missiles, their goal is to come here and kill us, so the more we can fight them over there and prevent it over there, the better for the United States. I am all for peace through strength.”

More than 100 House Democrats — just under half of the party’s caucus — voted to cut off all U.S. aid to Israel on Wednesday, marking another flashpoint in the party’s growing disillusionment with the Jewish state. It’s a result that would have been almost unimaginable even a year ago.

The fact that the number of anti-Israel votes included several longtime pro-Israel Democrats who had previously been endorsed by AIPAC — like Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Glenn Ivey (D-MD), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH) and Pat Ryan (D-NY) — is a sign that even some members in the mainstream wing of the party are running scared of a potential primary threat from the left. 

Combined with the Senate vote earlier this year in which 40 Democrats voted for a measure led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to block shipments of some weapons to the Jewish state, the message is clear: Israel can no longer count on reliable support from the Democratic Party.

And voting for the equivalent of a wrecking ball to the U.S.-Israel relationship — an amendment that even vocal critics of Israel described as flawed and a calculated political stunt by Republicans — is no longer a nonstarter for congressional Democrats. With a more carefully crafted amendment presented by a member without Rep. Thomas Massie’s (R-KY) baggage, the margin in support could have been greater.

Despite the significance of the Democratic defections on Israel, it’s also notable that nearly all of the Democrats in swing districts or running in closely watched battleground Senate races stood by their support of Israel and voted against the amendment.

Only two of the 16 House Democrats facing the most competitive races — districts the Cook Political Report rates as “Lean Democratic,” “Toss Up” or favoring Republicans — voted for the Massie amendment.

Those lawmakers were Reps. Derek Tran (D-CA) and Gabe Vasquez (D-NM). Rep. Don Davis (D-NC) was absent, but would have opposed the amendment.

Expand that out to include “Likely Democratic” districts, and only two of those 10 lawmakers voted for the amendment: Goodlander and Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV). Rep. Janelle Bynum (D-OR) voted present.

And nearly all of the Democratic candidates facing challenges from their left over their support for Israel stood their ground, even those running in deep-blue districts. That list includes Reps. Haley Stevens (D-MI) and Angie Craig (D-MN), who are both running for the Senate and facing fierce challenges from anti-Israel challengers. It also includes Reps. Wesley Bell (D-MO), Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), who have faced strong pushback from their opponents over their pro-Israel stances, but held firm on the issue.

The results mark a significant setback for AIPAC, which is struggling to maintain influence within the Democratic Party as support for Israel becomes a more partisan issue. More than a dozen of its endorsed candidates voted against its most central policy priority, including lawmakers like Ivey who won their House seats with significant AIPAC backing and had been seen as close to the group. A handful of others voted present.

Ryan, a onetime moderate who has drifted toward the left, also publicly went on the attack against AIPAC, engaging with the anti-Israel account TrackAIPAC, which has faced accusations of antisemitism, to declare that he no longer wants AIPAC’s support and plans to return donations from the group.

“We are deeply appreciative of the 314 Republicans and Democrats who voted to reject Thomas Massie’s latest anti-Israel effort and are disappointed by the 103 Democrats who voted with Massie to weaken America and our ally Israel,” AIPAC said in a statement.

AIPAC also warned that it and its members aren’t backing down and “will be actively engaged throughout this election cycle, and future election cycles, to support members of Congress of both parties who support a strong U.S.-Israel alliance and oppose those who don’t.”

It’s important to keep in mind that lawmakers’ stated rationale for supporting the amendment varies: some do seek to cut off any U.S. support for Israel and sever the relationship as we know it; some seek changes to how the relationship functions; and others sought to send a signal of their frustration with the current Israeli government and its prosecution of the war in Gaza with a largely symbolic vote they knew would not pass.

By the same token, many Democrats who voted against the amendment made clear that their votes were in part a reflection of their concerns with Massie’s approach, rather than a full-throated endorsement of the U.S.-Israel relationship as it currently exists. That was the position held by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), whose opposition to the amendment belied his overall concerns about the U.S.-Israel relationship.

Many Democrats called for changes in the relationship going forward, with Jeffries and other party leaders indicating they want direct military aid to end at the expiration of the current memorandum of understanding.

Observers also noted that the Congressional Black Caucus, which has traditionally held strong relationships with the Jewish community and pro-Israel world, was closely divided on the vote. Many of the caucus’ older or longer-tenured members voted to preserve aid to Israel, while newer and younger members for the most part voted against it.

The vote also underscored just how much of a role extreme voices have played within both parties in undermining relationships with allies under military threat. The right-wing grassroots hostility to Ukraine led to a number of party leaders — including a few Senate hawks — to vote against a 2024 funding bill for aid to Ukraine and Israel.

But even as there has been a strain of GOP opposition to Ukraine assistance, the Democrats’ turn against Israel has been more widespread. The fact that relatively few of the Democratic lawmakers who voted against the amendment offered a clear-throated defense of U.S. aid to Israel is a sign of just how politically toxic Israel has become within the party. 

“This vote should serve as a wake-up call [to Israel] that significant work is needed to repair its relationship with Democrats — not only to preserve bipartisan support in the United States, but also to protect Israel’s long-term security and prosperity,” Democratic Majority For Israel CEO Brian Romick said in a statement.

In the span of five days, one of Washington’s most vocal champions of the U.S. relationship with Israel died, while two prospective 2028 Democratic presidential contenders traveled to the Jewish state to define their approaches to the country. Though a coincidence of timing, those events, when taken together, underscored something much more significant: the passing of one generation of American politics vis-a-vis Israel and the opening contest over what will succeed it.

The events of the last week have distilled concerns that have repeatedly emerged at Jewish and Israeli gatherings, over Shabbat meals and in breakfast meetings: As the far left gains traction within the Democratic Party, and as the isolationist right increasingly finds support among Republicans, what does that mean for American Jews and U.S. support for Israel?

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who died suddenly on Saturday, represented a generation of politicians — across the political spectrum — for whom support for Israel was tied to deep, long-standing relationships with the Jewish state’s leaders, the belief in the country’s strategic positioning as a key ally and the ability of Israel’s friends in Washington to challenge Jerusalem without imperiling the relationship. 

His death sent shockwaves across the Jewish community at a time when U.S. support for Israel — including among Republicans — is on the decline.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), speaking to JI earlier this week, described Graham as “a passionate and formidable defender of Israel” and noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “trusted Lindsey and listened to him.” 

Cruz pointed out that “Lindsey would sometimes tell his friends messages they didn’t want to hear. Lindsey was not one to just blow smoke. He would tell people exactly what he thought, but that made him an incredibly effective advocate for Israel.”

Days before Graham died, former U.S. Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel was in Israel, where he delivered a speech — his own version of tough talk to Israelis — at Tel Aviv University on the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship. Speaking to reporters ahead of his speech, Emanuel, who served as White House chief of staff from 2009-2010, said that declining U.S. support for Israel “is not a Democratic Party problem. This is an American problem, and a generational problem.”

Emanuel pointed to an Associated Press/NORC Research poll released last week that showed declining support for Israel across both parties in the wake of the war in Gaza — though the erosion was considerably more pronounced among Democrats. The survey, which was conducted last month, also found that 3 in 10 Americans — including 2 in 10 Republicans under the age of 45 — believe Israel committed genocide in Gaza.

Meanwhile, a new survey from the Pew Research Center released on Friday found Israel underwater with young Americans across the political spectrum. Just 12% of Democrats between the ages of 18-29 have a favorable view of Israel, the survey found. Among young Republicans, that number is higher — but not by much. Twenty-eight percent of Republicans ages 18-29 had a favorable view of Israel. Contrast that with the 75% of Republicans (and 47% of Democrats) above the age of 65 who have favorable views of Israel.

Views of Israelis themselves are only somewhat less negative, with 33% of those surveyed between the ages of 18-29 having a favorable view of the people of Israel — not the government. Among young Republicans, that figure is 42% — something that should trigger flashing warning lights among those who have long relied on the support of an aging generation of politicians and voters who share Graham’s pro-Israel disposition. 

While the shift among Republicans is happening at a slower rate, movement in the GOP regarding Israel is apparent as the party’s “restrainers,” led by Vice President JD Vance, gain traction among young conservatives. As if to underscore the changing party dynamics, Politico yesterday reported on concerns among Republican Jewish donors over Vance’s approach to the Jewish state, citing his tough rhetoric toward Israeli leaders and support for diplomacy with Iran. 

Separate from Emanuel’s trip, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) also traveled to Israel last week, gaining attention for an incident in the West Bank in which local security forces stopped Khanna, who was accompanied by two aides and an activist with Breaking the Silence, after the congressman entered what had been until recently a closed military zone. He has since called for Israel to investigate the incident, even as Israeli officials denied elements of the congressman’s account. Khanna has not provided any evidence to back up his claim of being detained by settlers.

Speaking to The New York Times after he returned to the U.S., Khanna said, “Free advice to the Israelis: It’s not a good idea to detain long-shot presidential candidates. Not how you’re going to build good will with the next American president, whoever that is.” 

In his public comments and meetings, Emanuel conveyed a desire to halt the growing daylight between future generations of Israelis and Americans. Khanna, who a decade ago was a staunch supporter of close ties with Jerusalem, has adopted a different political calculation, leaning into the growing anti-Israel sentiment in his party as a launching pad for a national campaign. 

It’s no coincidence that two 2028 hopefuls chose to soft-launch their campaigns in Israel, conveying caution rather than camaraderie. It’s a sharp pivot from 18 years ago, when Barack Obama and John McCain — then their parties’ respective presidential nominees — each visited Israel in the run-up to the election, meeting with Israeli leaders and expressing support with the Israeli people.

If candidates used to travel to Israel to reassure both their constituencies and the Israeli populace of the strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship, the candidates traveling to Israel in 2026 are doing so to define themselves, and in the process treating the Jewish state as a test of political identity. 

The sort of stalwart support of generations past is rapidly eroding, leaving pro-Israel Americans on both sides of the aisle battling strong headwinds as those who represent the future of their parties shift their approaches to the Jewish state. With Graham’s death, one chapter in U.S.-Israel relations has closed. Now, Emanuel and Khanna are jockeying to write the next.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro defended Israel’s standing as a Jewish state, telling CNN in an interview that  the country faces a level of scrutiny and attack over its religious character not applied to the Muslim states throughout the region.

“For those who do not want there to be a Jewish state, oftentimes they will predicate their views on this notion that being grounded in a religion and being a democracy can’t coexist. I think it’s important to point out the hypocrisy of that view,” Shapiro said in an interview with CNN that aired on Monday. “When there are 46 majority Muslim nations, 23 of which have Islam as their official religion, either because of statute or their constitution, and only one has Judaism as their official religion, and yet we’re focused just on the Jewish state.”

Unlike countries that constitutionally declare an official religion, Israel has no official religion by law — though its 2018 Basic Law designates it as the nation-state of the Jewish people, and religious institutions play a significant role in civic life. Israel formally recognizes multiple religious communities, including Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Druze populations, and grants each its own religious courts for matters of personal status such as marriage and divorce.

The Democratic governor also said that he feels it’s important to stick to his convictions on the issue, rather than following trends or pressure.

“I think it is particularly important at this time to be open and vocal and honest about your views, and not put your finger in the wind and just cater to whoever is expressing their views the loudest,” Shapiro continued.

The comments come as attacks on Israel’s status as a Jewish state have become increasingly prevalent, particularly from the far left, including by at least one Democratic senate candidate.

Abdul El-Sayed, the far-left Democratic candidate for Michigan’s Senate seat, said at an event with Jewish supporters last week that he struggles to answer questions about whether he believes Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state.

At his “Jews for Abdul” event last week in Pontiac, Mich., a recording of which was obtained by Jewish Insider, El-Sayed, in response to a question from an audience member about him sidestepping inquiries about Israel’s right to exist, said, “I often struggle with the question that people ask in this particular scenario, because what they now ask is, ‘Do you believe in the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state,’ which, to me, forces the question of a definition of what a Jewish state means.”

SCOOP | Abdul El-Sayed, the far-left Democratic candidate for Michigan’s Senate seat, said at an event with Jewish supporters last week that he struggles to answer questions about whether he believes Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state.

“I often struggle with the… pic.twitter.com/ugjbXgxUvr

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 27, 2026

El-Sayed continued: “I need folks who want to ask me that question [to explain] what it is that they mean by that, and how that is consistent with any form of liberal values that we say we believe in here in the United States.”

He accused Israel of “bypassing” the issue of Palestinian rights and maintaining a Jewish majority in Israel by implementing apartheid in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza, and said that the question of Israel’s right to exist overlooks “the rights of people who’ve been displaced by Israeli action” dating back to 1948.

He said that U.S. support is “funding leadership” in Israel that is opposed to a two-state solution while Palestinians do not have a voice in that conversation, and said “it’s not actually our job to decide what the peace looks like there.” 

“[Israel] exists as it stands, but nobody ever asked me about the right of Palestine to exist, because it doesn’t exist. And so I just push back on the characterization here,” El-Sayed said. 

MORE EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Abdul El-Sayed says “I need folks who want to ask me that question [to explain] what it is that they mean by that, and how that is consistent with any form of liberal values that we say we believe in here in the United States.”

Read more:… pic.twitter.com/8kaWUqwYCK

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 27, 2026

El-Sayed’s candidacy, positions and affiliations — particularly his campaigning with streamer Hasan Piker, who has repeatedly shared antisemitic sentiments and support for terrorism — has drawn concern from the sizable Jewish community in Michigan and nationally.

Photos from the event shared by El-Sayed’s campaign appear to show around a few dozen people in the audience, at least one of whom — who raised the question about Israel’s right to exist — said she was not Jewish.

Asked at the Politico Security Summit in Washington on Tuesday if she still calls herself a Zionist, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) said, “I believe in a Jewish State of Israel, yes. And that to me isn’t a radical thing to say and I always have.”

“I can say that in the same breath that I criticize the military policy of Bibi Netanyahu,” she added.

Slotkin acknowledged it “used to be easier” to say that she considers herself a Zionist. “I come from a state that has a huge Arab and Muslim population, a very large Jewish population. There’s not been a single issue that I’ve seen that’s been more emotional than this one because so many people have family members who are caught in the middle of this conflict.” 

“As someone who served three tours in Iraq,” she continued, “I do have concerns with the way the Israelis are organizing military policy right now, certainly in Gaza but also other places.”

“What I can’t accept, though, is collective punishment that comes from saying, ‘well, I don’t like Bibi Netanyahu’s military policy so Jews in America’s synagogues should be attacked,’ including synagogues I’m very close to and spent my life growing up in,” Slotkin said, referring to the March car-ramming and shooting attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Mich. 

Slotkin called the attack “particularly personal” in an interview with Jewish Insider shortly after.

She continued on Tuesday, “That’s collective punishment that we wouldn’t allow when we’re talking about African Americans or talking about Italian Americans and so we shouldn’t allow it for Jewish Americans, either.”

Last November, Rahm Emanuel, the tough-talking Democratic operative and prospective presidential candidate, took the stage of the Jewish Federations of North America’s annual conference in Washington to deliver a blunt word of warning about Israel’s declining reputation in the United States and around the globe.

“I don’t mean to be the party pooper, but look, this is not going to be helpful if we’re not going to be honest with each other,” he said on an opening panel, urging the crowd to reckon with a marked downturn in support for the Jewish state over its war in Gaza, particularly among younger voters. “Israel is extremely unpopular.”

Emanuel, a veteran Jewish politician and party official who had recently concluded a tour as U.S. ambassador to Japan in the Biden administration, acknowledged his message might not ingratiate him to the thousands of Jewish communal leaders in the audience who were no doubt deeply familiar with the issue he was highlighting.

“This may be the last time I’m asked to speak to you. I get it,” he said with a hint of indifference. “But we have to be honest about the task we have” for those “who believe that there is something special” to the U.S.-Israel relationship. “We have our work cut out, and it’s not here to get applause,” he told the crowd.

In hindsight, Emanuel’s frankly worded comments marked something of a turning point in his approach to Israel and the Jewish community, foreshadowing more recent remarks in which he has voiced harsh criticism of the country’s military tactics in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 terror attacks and championed new policy proposals against American military aid to Israel.

Yet even as he builds a profile as a potential candidate willing to tell the Democratic Party hard truths and challenge orthodoxy on a range of issues from trans rights to child social media bans to age limits for politicians, Emanuel, 66, was reticent in exploring his views on Israel in more depth during an interview with Jewish Insider, which he had resisted for nearly a month.

“What I said couldn’t have been clearer,” he told JI last Thursday, referring to his recent comments on “Real Time With Bill Maher” calling for an end to U.S. military aid to Israel that raised eyebrows in the Jewish community. “There will no longer be U.S. taxpayer subsidies for the purchase of U.S. military equipment. Israel will be like every other ally. They can buy what they want, and they have to live within the restrictions.”

“You can decide to slice it, dice it, but that’s what it is,” he said.

While U.S. military funding to Israel has increasingly faced pushback in the Democratic Party, particularly on the far left, Emanuel’s argument that Israel no longer needs the sort of special treatment that he helped promote in the Obama White House has been striking to watch precisely because he has long been a staunch defender of the Jewish state and its founding ideals.

Emanuel, whose middle name is Israel and who speaks fluent Hebrew, holds a uniquely personal connection to the Jewish state. His late father, an Israeli immigrant born in Jerusalem, served in the Irgun, the Zionist paramilitary force that fought for Israeli independence. As a child, he spent summers in Israel and later volunteered as a civilian assistant to the Israel Defense Forces during the Gulf War. His son celebrated his bar mitzvah in Israel.

Emanuel, a moderate former congressman and mayor of Chicago, pointed out in the interview that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had himself proposed winding down U.S. military aid over the next 10 years, saying in January that the country had “come of age” and “developed incredible capacity” to continue on its own. 

Emanuel, however, said that he would instead suspend the assistance “immediately,” characterizing his position as “part of an overall policy” tied to Israel’s strategically secure position in the region as well as its political isolation on the world stage — both of which he argued have never been greater than now.

“If you or anybody thinks you’re going to continue the American taxpayers paying for this, good luck passing that in the U.S. Congress. You’re asking a president of the United States to spend X amount of political capital to do something that even Israel’s own prime minister acknowledged isn’t going to happen,” he said, referring to continued U.S. military aid.

The Jewish state “has made a decision to only lean on its defense and not lean on its diplomatic front,” he told JI, adding that Netanyahu had chosen to “walk away” from pursuing a two-state solution, support for which has declined in Israel since the Oct. 7 attacks and ensuing war in Gaza.

In his view, the U.S. should continue to stand with Israel only if its efforts in the region help contribute to peace. “Every risk you will take, the State of Israel takes, for peace, then America will stand by you,” he said. “We understand there’s risks. We have stood by Israel through thick and thin.”

“But,” he said, “when one friend in that relationship abandoned something that’s contrary to our interests and contrary, in my view, also to Israel’s interests,” it is reasonable, he suggested, to rethink that alliance.

“There will no longer be U.S. taxpayer subsidies for the purchase of U.S. military equipment. Israel will be like every other ally. They can buy what they want, and they have to live within the restrictions,” Emanuel said of his vision of the future of military aid to Israel.

His comments indicate that he is now embracing a fundamental reassessment of the U.S.-Israel alliance, abandoning even the pretense of tough love that once characterized his approach, among other moderate voices in the Democratic Party. 

For example, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a centrist Jewish Democrat who is also weighing a presidential campaign in 2028, recently reiterated his support for continued U.S. aid to Israel but said that it should be seen as “leverage” to exert pressure over the country’s use of American-made weapons.

“Rahm’s move tells you a lot about the politics of the Democratic Party on Israel now. And that is a sign of how Israel’s image has changed in the country,” said Dennis Ross, a former U.S. diplomat and Middle East negotiator who overlapped with Emanuel in the Obama administration.

Despite his strong attachment to Israel, Emanuel is reckoning with a changing party no longer broadly sympathetic to the pro-Israel perspective that had long been central to his political identity, even as he has tussled with Israeli leadership during his time as a public figure.

Last Friday, for example, Emanuel signaled he would back Graham Platner, the far-left Senate candidate in Maine now poised to become the Democratic nominee, even as the Marine veteran has called to block U.S. military aid to Israel while facing controversy over a Nazi tattoo he recently covered up.

“Whether it’s people chanting ‘Jews will not replace us’” in Charlottesville, “or somebody bombing Gov. Shapiro’s home, or somebody painting Nazi insignia on my fence, or the candidate saying ‘I did not know that was a Nazi’” insignia on his chest, “we’re going to have to confront this,” Emanuel told JI the day before announcing his support for Platner, while touting his record of fighting antisemitism.

“I’ve dealt with it when I ran for Congress,” he said on the phone from Chicago, noting that he was outside an Anne Frank exhibition opening in his home city. “And I’ve also been upfront when I think a decision is going to lead to the strategic and diplomatic isolation of, not only the State of Israel, but, more importantly, the Jewish people.”

Still, Emanuel seemed reluctant and even somewhat frustrated to answer further questions seeking clarity on the implications of his new approach to Israel and how he arrived at his position. He refused to confirm explicitly, for example, if he would back defensive aid for Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, which has recently emerged as a subject of intense debate in some corners of the Democratic Party.

It is a significant contrast with where Emanuel stood during his time as Obama’s chief of staff. In the White House from 2009-2010, Emanuel was one of Obama’s top consiglieres on policies relating to Israel. He was involved in initial funding to boost Israel’s Iron Dome system, an effort that culminated in a 10-year memorandum of understanding between the two countries that provides $3.8 billion in annual aid through 2028, which the White House touted, at the time, as “the largest single pledge of military assistance in U.S. history.”

In 2009, Emanuel shared more reassuring words in his address to the JFNA’s annual gathering, praising Netanyahu while citing his own familial ties to Israel as well as what he had called the “privileged point of view” from understanding the Jewish state’s “value as a homeland.”

“Those who have questioned” whether the Obama administration’s opposition to Israeli settlement building in the West Bank and outreach to the Arab world “implies diminished support for Israel, that is not the intent,” he said, filling in for his boss. “It is not the case and it never will be. The truth is the opposite. Only through dialogue will Israel achieve the peace it seeks.”

Emanuel now takes a more jaundiced view of Israeli diplomacy, fueling his calls for an end to U.S. aid. “Under Prime Minister Netanyahu, in the last three years, you’ve lost Europe, you’ve lost the American public, and you picked up Somaliland,” he scoffed to JI, referring to Israel’s decision to formally recognize the secessionist region in the Horn of Africa last year. “As my grandmother would say, ‘Such a deal.’ That is your only diplomatic achievement.”

Julie Fishman Rayman, senior vice president of policy and political affairs at the American Jewish Committee, called Emanuel’s views “disappointing and worrying,” arguing that U.S. security assistance to Israel “is not just vital to deterring further attacks and ensuring the survival of the state of Israel, but is integrally tied to safeguarding American interests in the region.”

Emanuel argued that his position on U.S. aid is a logical extension of sentiments he had conveyed in 2009 while in the Obama administration, when he repeatedly clashed with Netanyahu over settlement expansion in the West Bank, which the White House cautioned would jeopardize prospects for achieving a two-state solution.

“I went straight to the prime minister to his face and said, ‘What you’re doing is going to lead to the great isolation of Israel,’” Emanuel recalled, noting, as he often does, that Netanyahu called him a “self-hating Jew,” underscoring the highly personal tenor of their long-testy relationship. “Look, I have a longstanding relationship,” he explained. “I’m honest about it.”

But even as he argues that Israel is today “a different country from a sense of wealth and capacity,” he has strained to harmonize the motives now animating his current approach. He has dismissed speculation over the sincerity of his stance and whether it is rooted in a good-faith view of Israel’s economic standing or if it is instead a more cynical political calculation tailored to a rising anti-Israel faction in the Democratic Party.

Though in contrast with high-profile voices on the far left, Emanuel has shied away from charged rhetoric about genocide in Gaza, saying it is a legal question, as well accusations that Israel had tricked President Donald Trump into war with Iran, which he says ignores U.S. agency in the conflict. He has said it is a “mistake” to restrict arms sales to Israel, suggesting that he is not aligned with related resolutions that were introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) last month and notably drew backing from most Senate Democrats.

Emanuel’s allies said in recent interviews that they were not surprised with his approach, saying that he has been building to this moment for some time. “Do I agree with him? Not necessarily,” former Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY), who served with Emanuel in Congress, told JI. “But this is not a breakthrough position. He’s expressed those concerns for years.”

David Axelrod, a former chief strategist to Obama, likewise agreed in a text message to JI that “Rahm’s basic concerns about where Bibi is leading are not new,” using Netanyahu’s nickname. “Rahm, like a lot of us, has always believed a two-state solution was the only road to peace and Bibi has been deeply, irretrievably opposed and actively hostile to the notion.”

“You ask these questions like somehow I’ve changed. The prime minister used to articulate a two-state solution. He was for it. He’s the one that’s changed,” Emanuel said of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

One prominent Jewish Democrat, who asked to remain anonymous to discuss a charged issue, called Emanuel’s stance a practical response that “takes the wind out of the sails of the far left and the far right,” which have politicized funding for Israel. “As long as we’re giving aid to Israel, Americans will feel like they have a say in Israeli policy and how that investment is managed.”

But if that is Emanuel’s aim, he has not made it clear. In conversation with JI, he was hesitant to clarify his own positions when pressed. Asked if he would back Iron Dome funding, he said he had been “part of the financing” for a “joint project” that he called “key for Israel’s security” when it was first developed with the United States.

He declined to elaborate further about such aid. “U.S. taxpayers should not be in the position of subsidizing a country,” he reiterated. “You know my history with the Iron Dome,” he said. “I’m done. I’ve answered it.”

Though some allies of Emanuel are willing to indulge his views more favorably than other 2028 prospects with thinner resumes related to Middle East policy, a range of Jewish and pro-Israel organizations are now pushing back on his recent turn against U.S. military aid.

“It’s in America’s interests to keep our word and help a democratic partner shield innocent civilians from missiles,” Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, told JI, referring to the Iron Dome. “Reneging on the Obama administration’s signed agreement with our closest ally in the Middle East would send a devastating message to our allies, empower our enemies and do nothing to advance peace.”

Brian Romick, president of Democratic Majority for Israel, said that “Israel’s situation is not comparable to our other close allies.”

“Unlike Japan, South Korea and Germany, Israel does not have permanent U.S. troops on the ground,” he told JI recently. “It’s also surrounded by enemies who actively want to wipe it off the face of the earth. U.S. security assistance reflects that reality and the significant strategic benefits the aid provides.”

Michael Makovsky, president and CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, told JI in a recent interview that he disagreed with Emanuel, even as he acknowledged the sentiment as a “legitimate view.” Still, he added that it is “in the U.S. interest” to continue providing military aid to Israel, “which anyway all goes to buying U.S. weaponry.”

Even some pro-Israel Democrats sympathetic to Emanuel and his perspective said his comments on military aid raise more questions than they answer. One influential Jewish Democrat who has long been acquainted with Emanuel, speaking on the condition of anonymity to address a sensitive topic, expressed concerns that ending aid to Israel could stoke further calls from the far left to condition military funding or block future weapons sales outright.

For his part, Emanuel avoided commenting on the question of Israel’s qualitative military edge, which the U.S. is legally obligated to ensure but allies say could suffer without military aid. “I feel like we’re taking the same question from 50 angles,” Emanuel told JI. “I want Israel to fight for peace the way it’s proven that it’s fought in the last three years. That’s what’s missing,” he said last week.

“You ask these questions like somehow I’ve changed,” Emanuel said earlier in the call. “The prime minister used to articulate a two-state solution. He was for it. He’s the one that’s changed.”

The perennial complaint from supporters of Israel that the Jewish state has “bad PR” has sparked dozens of organizations and books over the decades and prompted the Israeli government to invest hundreds of millions in public diplomacy, including a $730 million allocation in its 2026 budget.

Yet the problem has only worsened after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, during the subsequent Gaza war and through the war with Iran this year. A new paper from the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University seeks to analyze the challenges and find solutions for Israel’s government to better handle them.

In an interview with Jewish Insider, the paper’s authors — Akiva Tor, a former Israeli ambassador to South Korea and head of the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s department for world Jewry and world religions, and Ofir Dayan, author of Intifada Globalized, about young Westerners’ turn away from Israel — characterized Israel’s image problem as a danger to its security.

“Everyone knows that there is a huge hasbara problem for Israel,” Tor said, using a Hebrew word that translates to “explaining” and is used to describe Israel’s efforts to portray the country in a positive light. “We tried to see what was unique in this moment … through a politically neutral perspective.”

Dayan noted that “it’s become a real issue of national security when Israel faces sanctions and countries are not willing to sell weapons. It affects Israel’s ability to execute plans and achieve its goals, and has a direct influence on Israel’s capability to fight.”

She added, “Since Oct. 7, we see a shift happening not only among youth and young adults, but it’s reaching positions of power, like [New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani and elsewhere.”

Dayan said that there is nothing new about the rhetoric or harassment of Israeli and pro-Israel students abroad — she encountered it personally as an undergraduate and graduate student at Columbia University in 2017-2022 — but “what is unique about this moment is that people who supported terrorist organizations and the destruction of the State of Israel, sanctions and boycotts are no longer hiding behind the facade of human rights. Individuals, organizations and countries are taking steps they have not taken before to significantly harm Israel’s national security.”

One example she gave was European Union member states taking steps toward canceling the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which would downgrade relations between Israel and its largest trading partner. In addition, she said academic boycotts of Israel, both overt and covert, are much broader than in the past.

Israel is also in the unprecedented situation in which its prime minister is under criminal indictment at the Hague and faces genocide charges at the International Court of Justice.

“I was consul-general in San Francisco during Operation Cast Lead [in 2008-2009],” Tor said, “and people talked about genocide when 3,000 [Palestinians] were killed … but now it’s at the ICJ and [former Deputy Secretary of State] Wendy Sherman is using the term. Things that existed in the past have now reached a level we haven’t seen before.” 

The intended audience for Dayan and Tor’s 40-page paper, currently available only in Hebrew, is the Israeli government.

“We’ve seen clumsiness by Israel in the past, but I don’t think we’ve seen this level of dysfunction,” Tor said. “The clearest expression of this is … probably that at Israel’s worst moment of crisis, the job [of head of national public diplomacy directorate] was not filled for 2.5 years.”

At the outset of the Gaza war, Moshik Aviv held the position, but resigned in early 2024. This week, Israel’s Cabinet authorized the appointment of former Deputy Foreign Minister and Ambassador to the U.K. Tzipi Hotovely to fill the role.

“The system is not being run,” Tor said. “We spoke to journalists and newspaper editors about the way the media was simply not handled for the most part. The greatest example is Charlie Kirk’s letter to Netanyahu in May last year, where he said the only people defending Israel on [American] TV are you and me. Where are the Israeli spokespeople?”

Tor said that “internal political constraints” are behind much of the dysfunction, which has led to “self-censorship.”

For example, Israel allowed hundreds of aid trucks into Gaza each day for most of the war, but had Cabinet ministers and other political figures claim Israel was not in order to appeal to their far-right political bases.

“That’s a very dangerous situation for Israel. It’s very difficult to address Israel’s image problems seriously if the government is not interested in doing so,” Tor said. “I’m not aware of a situation [in the past] in which Israel’s government did not want to explain itself.”

Tor lamented that “Israel is judged by the statements of its most extreme ministers or members of Knesset who spoke. That is part of the politicization; the government is mute about its intentions, probably because of internal tensions within the government, and then the most extreme say we will destroy Gaza — it caused and is continuing to cause tremendous damage to Israel.”

Even if the government had done a better job, the fact that the war in Gaza lasted for two years posed immense challenges.

“Israel cannot fight for more than two years with the kinds of images it creates and avoid deep international isolation,” Tor posited. 

The second half of Tor and Dayan’s paper provides suggestions for improvement.

One is to empower one governmental body to be in charge of public diplomacy across the entire government, including drafting messages, recruiting figures to spread those messages and measuring impact.

“We are realistic,” Dayan said. “No one is going to close government offices that are doing the exact same work, but we need one body that will say ‘this is the message Israel is trying to convey’ and make sure all of the relevant ministries are in line with it.”

Dayan served in the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit during her mandatory military service and again as a reservist in recent years, and said that “the IDF has no one telling them what to say. That is not the right process. [The government needs to] dictate one message so that all agencies and ministries will speak in one voice.”

There are four different government offices speaking for Israel on social media, and they do not work together, both Tor and Dayan pointed out.

“They’re all producing content that is very unlikely to become viral or speak to anyone under age 40,” Dayan said.

Tor said that, for Hotovely to be effective in her new role, she will have to have a voice at the Cabinet table. 

“If there is going to be a plan to flatten Bint Jbeil [in Lebanon], she will have to say what that means for Israel’s image,” he said.

One step they suggested that Israel take immediately is a public diplomacy campaign to defend Israel against charges of genocide, ahead of the decision from the ICJ. 

“Israel’s defense effort must include a strong public relations campaign using all available resources to prove Israel’s innocence before the ICJ and the court of world opinion,” they wrote. “The genocide charge is weak and specious, but Israel may lose its case if the hostile political agenda attempting to influence the court is not adequately countered.”

The report also suggests that Israel facilitate cooperation between Diaspora Jewry and Christian Zionists, something that Tor said was always a challenge when he led the Israeli Foreign Ministry department for world Jewry and world religions.

“Evangelicals are Israel’s friends, and liberal Jews are Israel’s friends, but they are very polarized from each other in American politics,” he pointed out. “This crisis moment may enable an opportunity for a new kind of cooperation, because both Jewish communities who love Israel and the pro-Israel Christians are under attack from the left and right.”

“We should come together to think about how to defend the basic legitimacy of Zionism,” he added.

Among their suggestions for those populations are to ensure 70,000 young Jews visit Israel on Birthright programs annually, and 100,000 young Christians do the same on a similar program each year. In addition, they call to encourage liberal rabbinical students and heads of liberal North American Jewish congregations to conduct study visits to Israel.

The INSS researchers also say that higher education is one of the most important spheres in which Israel can operate.

“Many Western university presidents would like to come back and work with Israeli institutions,” Dayan said. “They understand the academic excellence Israeli universities bring with them. But as of now, there is no concrete plan to rebuild those relations.” 

The Association of University Heads – Israel wrote a plan that it submitted to the government, which has not adopted it, she noted.

The paper suggested the government start a $100 million fund to “jump-start Israeli research.” The report also suggests flying presidents of 100 top-rated universities and academic institutions with many Jewish students to Israel over the next 18 months, so they can return and tell their boards why they should work with Israel.

Another element of their plan is a reimagining of Israeli outreach in Arabic and Persian.

Asked if they would suggest that laws be passed requiring the government to not leave positions empty in this field, or to allocate a certain amount of funds, Dayan said that “Israeli governments find creative ways to bypass laws when they need it. We need more public awareness and for the Israeli public to demand these roles be filled and that this issue of national security be addressed.”

“We don’t vote according to who promises to better Israel’s international standing, so I think decision-makers get this cue that we don’t care,” Dayan added. “But post-Oct. 7, [Israelis] care more and more. When Israeli discharged soldiers can’t travel the world because they risk getting arrested, this is an issue more and more people in Israel are going to care about. … We need to force politicians to address it as well.”

Amid the downbeat assessment of Israel’s political standing in the U.S., two new polls that came out last week suggest that the Jewish state still can rely on a sizable, if largely Republican, constituency of support.

The biggest takeaway from these two new polls — one commissioned by NBC News and one conducted by the respected GOP firm Echelon Insights — is that Israel has become a partisan issue, with Democrats turning decidedly against the Jewish state while Republicans have become strongly supportive.

All told, the polls show the public evenly divided over Israel, with the splits largely along party, ideological and generational lines. The results indicate President Donald Trump’s embrace of the Jewish state has caused Democrats to take an instinctively more negative view — in a continuation of how politics has generally operated in the Trump era.

Echelon Insights, which surveyed 1,022 respondents from March 12-16, found 44% of respondents held a favorable view of Israel, while 38% held an unfavorable view. While Israel’s plus-6 net favorability score is nothing to write home about, the results are noticeably better than a recent Pew Research Center poll that drew outsized attention for finding Israel’s net favorability rating at a dismal minus-23 (37/60%).

The Echelon poll found support was highest for Israel among the most conservative voters, with 72% of “very conservative” voters viewing the Jewish state favorably, while 61% of “somewhat conservative” respondents said the same. Moderates broke evenly, with 40% viewing Israel favorably and 39% unfavorably.

But among “somewhat liberal” respondents, support for Israel dropped noticeably, with just 31% viewing the Jewish state favorably and 55% unfavorably. And among the “very liberal” voters, only 14% viewed Israel favorably and 70% unfavorably — a worse favorability rating than Iran and China. 

The Echelon survey found the same general splits within both parties: Republicans under 50 were significantly less supportive of Israel than their older counterparts, with 44% viewing it favorably and 33% unfavorably. By contrast, 78% of Republicans over 50 gave Israel positive marks. 

Similarly, there was a sizable minority of Democrats over 50 (33%) who viewed Israel favorably, compared to the smaller share of under-50 Democrats (17%) who said the same. 

The NBC poll, conducted by SurveyMonkey between March 30-April 13, framed its question about Israel in a different way, asking respondents whether they were more sympathetic to Israelis or Palestinians. The poll found an even 50-50% split on the question.

The groups that were most sympathetic to Palestinians were Democrats (75% viewed Palestinians more favorably, 25% Israelis) and Gen Zers (74%/26%). 

Michael Blake, a far-left challenger to Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), said at a debate  on Tuesday hosted by One NYC Action that he would oppose missile defense aid for the Jewish state — the latest flip-flop on Israel policy issues by a candidate who has reversed numerous of his past stances on the subject over the course of his campaign.

Blake was once a close ally of AIPAC and a champion of the U.S.-Israel relationship, but has repositioned himself as a harsh critic of the Jewish state — and has continued to move left during the course of his campaign.

Blake said this week that he would oppose all aid, including defensive aid, to Israel.

“We need a permanent ceasefire, full stop. We need to absolutely stop the aid that is happening. We need to stop sending money,” Blake said. 

Blake expressed the opposite view just months ago in a January event with the Ben Franklin Club, saying that he viewed protecting and supporting Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system as a separate issue than blocking other military aid, and indicated that he would continue to support Iron Dome.

In that same event, Blake asserted his continued support for anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions legislation he helped pass in the state assembly — before going on to reverse that stance in late March.

Blake reiterated his new opposition to the anti-BDS legislation in the debate this week, saying he lacked the proper information about the bill at the time of his previous support.

On Thursday, Blake picked up an endorsement from TrackAIPAC, the virulently anti-Israel group that has attracted accusations of antisemitism from other Democrats, and which requires endorsees to adopt a host of anti-Israel stances, including a full arms embargo on Israel.

He also argued that the war in Iran, and efforts to stop Trump from launching an all-out assault on the country, were proof of why Torres needed to be defeated, without fully explaining that argument. Torres has also opposed the war, condemned Trump’s comments threatening the destruction of Iranian civilization and said the president needs to be removed from office.

“It was reported today that Trump went into [the war] because Netanyahu and the Israeli government lied to him consistently in a February meeting and prior to that,” Blake continued, again asserting that as an “indication on why Ritchie Torres has to go,” without explaining further.

As California’s gubernatorial race heats up, five leading candidates said at a forum on Thursday that they are committed to deepening the state’s partnership with Israel and fighting efforts to boycott the Jewish state. 

The candidates — Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa, a former state lawmaker and Los Angeles mayor; Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA); Tom Steyer, a billionaire businessman and former presidential candidate; and Matt Mahan, a tech entrepreneur and mayor of San Jose; along with Republican Steve Hilton, a conservative commentator who was once an advisor to former British Prime Minister David Cameron — appeared together Thursday night at a Los Angeles candidate forum hosted by Jewish California (formerly JPAC), the Bay Area Jewish Community Relations Council, the Los Angeles Jewish Federation and the Skirball Cultural Center.

“I’ve been to Israel half a dozen times. I’ve been all over the region. I’ve seen the innovation in energy. I’ve seen the innovation in water technology, and of course, California should partner with Israel to meet our own energy and water needs,” Swalwell, who represents a Bay Area district, said. “I will bring back as many values and technologies from Israel that can help Californians. That’s the job of the next governor.” 

Hilton praised the business relationship between California and Israel, and said “that foundation of prosperity and cooperation is how we build a stronger future for Israel and for us here in California.”

Villaraigosa also outlined his many past trips to Israel. “I’ve been to Israel half a dozen times, including the last time three years ago, when I wasn’t in office anymore. As governor of this state, I will work with the State of Israel,” he said. 

Mahan called California’s relationship with Israel “an important one for our country and for our state.” 

“In Silicon Valley,” he continued, “I’ve lost count of how many brilliant entrepreneurs [and] investors I’ve met from Israel who have brought incredible innovation to our state. And that exchange is something we need to continue to invest in.” 

Steyer, like the other Democrats on stage, drew a line between the Israeli people and the Israeli government. 

“Are we talking about the people of Israel? Or are you talking about the administration that runs the State of Israel? As far as I can tell, Mr. Netanyahu is quite a close confidant, ally and co-believer with our president. There’s nothing about our president, literally, that I agree with,” said Steyer. “How do I feel about the people of Israel, a scrappy group of people trying to build a country, build their families, build businesses? That’s a completely different question.” 

A recent Public Policy Institute of California poll showed a crowded, closely contested race, with five candidates neck-and-neck in the all-party primary, each with 10-14% of the vote. 

Hilton led the pack with 14%, followed by former Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) with 13%, and then Republican Chad Bianco, sheriff of Riverside County, with 12%. Swalwell was at 11%, with Steyer at 10%. The top two finishers face off in the November general election.

A spokesperson for Porter told Jewish Insider she could not attend due to a scheduling conflict.

“Rep. Porter spoke to Jewish California last year about her vision to address the many issues facing California as Governor, including the increase in antisemitism, and she looks forward to continuing the conversation,” the spokesperson said.

A spokesperson for Bianco did not respond to a request for comment, but SF JCRC CEO Tyler Gregory told JI he also had a scheduling conflict. Democrat Xavier Becerra, the former secretary of Health and Human Services, also did not participate. 

All five candidates at the forum on Thursday said they oppose the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Hilton and Mahan, citing the state’s anti-BDS law, said they would push back on efforts by municipalities to boycott or divest from Israel.

“They’re illegal. I will make sure that, as governor, my attorney general, sues these cities to stop them breaking the law,” said Hilton. 

“We should push against any attempt to unwind our prohibition of it,” Mahan said of the BDS movement.

Each of the candidates also criticized how public universities in the state responded to anti-Israel and antisemitic protesters during the spring 2024 encampments. 

“I’m a proud graduate of UCLA, but I’ll tell you something, I’ve never been so embarrassed and ashamed about what I saw happen on a UC campus, and as governor, we will not tolerate that,” Villaraigosa said. “The fact that it took so long to extricate these people that tried to intimidate people and wouldn’t allow them to go to class, wear their yarmulke, was absolutely unacceptable.” 

Mahan criticized a questionnaire from a union representing thousands of professors and lecturers in the California State University system that asked candidates last year to say they would refuse donations from AIPAC and JPAC.

“That tells you how bad it has gotten. As governor I will actively call that out,” said Mahan. “One of the most powerful things the governor has is the bully pulpit, and it’s important as governor to speak directly to that divisiveness and call it out and explain that it is wrong and that we will not tolerate it in our public institutions. We also have to talk about curriculum.” 

Steyer called freedom to protest “one of the hallmarks of higher education” in the U.S., but said “when protest moves into discriminating against other students, that’s when protest is no longer acceptable.” 

Swalwell recounted a recent conversation with a friend who said his daughter had taken some schools off her college list because of fears about antisemitism.

“A metric of success for me is that Jewish California students feel safe in every California university and college,” said Swalwell. “Yes, California and our colleges have always led some of the best movements in our history. However, that does not give you license to hate, discriminate, to commit violence.”

Hilton described visiting UCLA after the encampments to speak to Jewish students and called on the other candidates in the room to bring their messaging of fighting antisemitism to other audiences, not just Jewish ones.

“It’s still going on, this sense of fear and intimidation, and we’ve got to take a stronger stance,” Hilton said. “Our elected leaders in this state aren’t quite as clear on some of these issues, and give succor to the hate and the ideology that’s causing this fear among our Jewish population. So I would like them to speak with the same strength and clarity against this ideology everywhere, not just in this audience.” 

Other questions touched on immigration, homelessness, affordability and the impact of artificial intelligence. The state’s gubernatorial primary will take place on June 2, and the top two vote-getters, irrespective of party, will advance to the general election. 

As she launches a bid to reclaim her House seat, former Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA) said that she wants to help lead the effort to push back against anti-Israel voices in the Democratic Party.

During her time in the House, from 2019-2023, Luria brought pro-Israel colleagues together to stand in support of the Jewish state in the face of others who were critical of it. She told Jewish Insider in an interview last week that those critics are loud and are “drowning out the fact that the support for Israel remains strong.”

“Having more people like me who are willing to speak up on that issue, in support of maintaining security assistance through the memorandum of understanding and continuing to maintain a strong relationship with Israel is important,” Luria said, adding that she wants to be a “leader” among new members and former colleagues “to show that the support [for Israel] remains strong.”

Luria said she continues to view Israel as the U.S.’ “strongest ally” in the Middle East and “key to our national security,” and that she continues to oppose any effort to condition U.S. aid to the Jewish state.

Luria said that Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7 was “unconscionable” and that Israel “has a right to defend themselves and respond to that kind of security threat.” She said she was glad to see the ceasefire deal and the release of hostages, but said that the path forward remains difficult, and will require the involvement of the U.S. and the world community, with the removal of Hamas from Gaza as the key first step.

The former congresswoman, a prominent Democratic Iran hawk during her time in office who was skeptical of efforts to reenter the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, said that the Trump administration’s military action against Iran last summer, done in conjunction with Israel, appears to have “slowed … and delayed” Iran’s capacity to develop a nuclear weapon.

But she argued that the administration, in claiming that the nuclear program had been effectively ended, had “overblown” the effect of the strikes. She also criticized the administration for its extensive use of U.S. military power, in Iran and elsewhere, without consultation with or approval by Congress.

“I’ve said over and over again that anything that needs to be done to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon needs to be done,” she added. “I think that the president made that decision to act in that moment because it was an imperative to stop them from having it. I just think it’s disingenuous to the American people to do a victory lap and say we were successful. Because the fact is, the threat is still there. They’re going to build it back, and we’re going to continue to be faced with this issue.”

Asked about the prospect of renewed strikes on the Islamic Republic in support of Iranian protesters, Luria said that such action could be contingent on who or what the targets are, who would come to power in the aftermath and whether the end state would actually improve the situation for Iranians.

“I think there’s so many unanswered questions, and it’s hard to say what way to go forward with the little amount of information that we’re able to receive” given the Iranian internet blackout, she explained. “I think that international diplomatic pressure, including very strongly from the U.S., to end the violence by the government against protesters is important.”

Luria said that she’s been concerned by the rise in violent rhetoric and actual violence against both the Jewish community and other communities  — which she connected in part to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. 

Luria was a member of the House select committee that investigated the attack. She noted that one of the rioters, pardoned by President Donald Trump, wore a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt to the riot.

“The kind of activity that is both violent rhetorically and in action has somehow become acceptable in our political discourse,” Luria said. “You have the president, who is trying to act like Jan. 6 didn’t happen. He’s trying to whitewash it. … When vitriol and hate and division is sown from the top, it filters down, and then whatever lens people see that through — if someone’s lens is that they want to take that out in a way that’s antisemitic and towards the Jewish community, they’ve been emboldened to do that.”

She said it’s critical to speak up against antisemitism, and for truth, and to prevent people from trying to rewrite history, vowing to continue to “stand up and speak out directly against antisemitism.”

Asked about antisemitism on the left, and efforts to rewrite the history of Israel, the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks and the Jewish people, Luria affirmed that she sees similar trends on the far left, and that she believes extremist anti-Israel rhetoric by leaders can normalize antisemitic violence.

“Everyone in leadership, everyone in government, everyone in the faith community, needs to stand up and say that this is unacceptable,” Luria said. “And I think that I have done that at every occasion that it was necessary and every opportunity that I had while serving in that kind of role, both in Congress and — smaller scale — when serving in the military.”

After leaving office, Luria spent a semester as a fellow at the Georgetown University Institute of Public Policy focusing on bipartisanship, and worked in the maritime defense industry. She also grappled with multiple deaths in her family, including her son-in-law, who was 28, and her father.

Luria said she decided to make a new bid for Congress because of the “the polarization, the fact that Congress is not doing their job, the Republicans in the House, in my mind, have no backbone, no ability to show any independent thought.” She said that Democrats retaking the House will be the best way to check the Trump administration’s power.

She acknowledged that the race, in Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District, centered in the Tidewater area, may be difficult, but emphasized she has won tough races in the district before.

“I think people are looking for change and looking for Congress to do more for them, and so, I’ve thrown my hat back in,” Luria said. “Listening to people on the ground, everybody is really focused on, you know, that high cost of living, access to health care, the cost of health care.”

One other major Democratic candidate remains in the primary against Luria, but she is strongly favored as the frontrunner.

The seat is currently held by Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA), who unseated Luria in 2022.

Luria sees the results of the November 2025 statewide elections, in which Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger and scandal-tarnished Attorney General Jay Jones, also a Democrat, both won the district, as a sign that “the political tide has turned.”

Luria said that affordability will be a major priority for her, including healthcare prices, and that she’ll maintain the focus she had in office on the military and the Navy — the district being home to the Norfolk naval station, the Navy’s headquarters. Overall, she said, she wants to tamp down on the “chaos” coming out of the Trump administration.

“I think Congress has a role in this, and they have not stood up and done their role,” she said, referring to Trump’s tariff policies, threats against Greenland, antagonism toward NATO and military action against Venezuela and alleged drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean.

As two Democratic Michigan Senate candidates compete for the votes of anti-Israel voters with accusations of genocide against the Jewish state, Abdul El-Sayed, is going after state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, as insufficiently and inauthentically critical of Israel.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), meanwhile, is solidifying her support for Israel, receiving an endorsement this week from Democratic Majority for Israel and calling herself a “proud pro-Israel Democrat [who] believe[s] America is stronger when we stand with our democratic allies, confront antisemitism and extremism, and keep our promises to our friends abroad and our working families here at home.”

With significant Arab and Muslim and Jewish constituencies, Israel policy issues are poised to play a significant role in Michigan’s Democratic primary next year.

El-Sayed entered the race as a vocal critic of Israel, while McMorrow, in recent months, has joined him in describing the war in Gaza as a genocide, as well as saying she would support efforts to cut off offensive weapons shipments to Israel.

El-Sayed, in a recent event at Michigan State University, criticized McMorrow for not taking that position sooner, describing allegations of genocide in Gaza as a matter of clear and incontrovertible fact. Video of the comments was published by the Michigan Advance.

He compared McMorrow’s position to someone taking months to decide that the sky is blue and saying, “let me give you five caveats about why it might not be blue.”

El-Sayed also suggested that McMorrow’s positions changed because she was seeking support from AIPAC, and only took a more critical stance on Israel after the group declined to support her. The far-left publication Drop Site alleged that McMorrow had been seeking an AIPAC endorsement earlier in the year and had authored a pro-Israel position paper. 

McMorrow’s campaign has denied that she completed a questionnaire for AIPAC and McMorrow said last month she would not accept the group’s support. AIPAC has previously endorsed Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), who has maintained her position on Israel, in House races, but has not weighed in on the Senate race.

“When there’s 20,000 kids who died, that’s a genocide,” El-Sayed said in his remarks at Michigan State. “When people who are from the very country that committed — whose government committed that genocide say it’s a genocide, at some point you kind of just gotta be like, ‘Oh it’s a f***ing genocide.’ … “I don’t pretend that when 20,000 babies are murdered by our tax dollars, that there’s hemming and hawing about saying because it’s the truth.” El-Sayed was referring to numbers from the Hamas-run Ministry of Health indicating that almost 20,000 children and teenagers were killed in the war.

He suggested that McMorrow is trying to “package” herself as a progressive changemaker while the “substance” of her policies is “the same old politics.”

Asked last month whether the war in Gaza is a genocide, McMorrow said that it is.

“We have [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu trying to tell us what we’ve been seeing with our own eyes is not true,” McMorrow said. “It is true. And two things can be true at once. … The position of the United States should not be that we support Netanyahu with no check and balances.”

Asked about El-Sayed’s criticisms, McMorrow’s campaign referred Jewish Insider to those remarks.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney, who died Monday, was remembered by former officials and pro-Israel leaders as a supporter of the Jewish state and a strong voice on U.S. national security issues throughout his time in public service.

Cheney, seen as a particularly powerful vice president, was a key voice in the George W. Bush administration during the War on Terror and also served as secretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush, chief of staff to President Gerald Ford and a leader in the House Republican Conference as a representative from Wyoming.

“He was always a big supporter of Israel while he was in the Bush administration but also before, as a congressman and as defense secretary in the first Bush years,” Tevi Troy, a presidential historian who served in the George W. Bush White House, told Jewish Insider, also highlighting the prominent pro-Israel voices with whom Cheney surrounded himself as vice president.

“I was always very impressed by how well-prepared he was, how knowledgeable he was and how focused he was,” Troy continued. “In meetings with President Bush, he usually didn’t say much — because he knew that if he said something, it might color how the room reacted. But he would give his views. He would listen attentively in the meetings and he would give his views to Bush afterwards. … He was revered in the administration, and if he did weigh in on an issue, you knew that he was going to have a lot of sway on that issue. But he also knew what the role of vice president was.”

Troy, reflecting on the dynamics between the president and vice president in several recent administrations, said that Cheney stands out in both his skill and knowledge but also in the fact that he had no ambitions to run for president — which Troy said gave his counsel “more weight.”

“It wasn’t about what his long-term ambitions were, but what he thought was best for the administration and the country,” Troy said.

Danielle Pletka, a distinguished senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said that like other Republicans of his generation, Cheney’s support for Israel deepened in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, as the U.S. and Israel faced a shared threat. She described him as a “great guy” who was “never confused about what was right.”

“I think he recognized that the Middle East that we had nurtured over decades was one that in many ways allowed for the growth of Al-Qaida and he set about helping to change those things,” Pletka said. “People excoriate him for the Iraq War — but I can assure you the people of Iraq don’t excoriate him.”

“At the end of the day, he was always an extremely fierce patriot and did what he thought was best for American interests, and like a lot of conservatives understood very clearly that our friendship and our partnership with Israel was part and parcel of that,” she continued.

Pletka also described Cheney as “very clear-eyed” about the threats the U.S. faced in the Middle East, including from Iran, and that he “believed in seizing opportunities” to disrupt Iran and other adversaries.

“When I think about how Iran was allowed to exploit the situation in Iraq — I know he did his utmost to ensure that we pushed back, often without success in the second half of the Bush administration,” she continued. “When we were losing in Iraq, he was absolutely instrumental in ensuring that the policy got turned around.”

Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter said on X that the “passing of former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney marks the loss of a great American patriot, a devoted public servant and a dear friend of Israel.”

“His leadership and his belief in the strength of the U.S.-Israel alliance will not be forgotten,” Leiter continued.

The Jewish Federations of North America, in a statement, described Cheney as a “a dedicated public servant who was a friend to the Jewish community and played a significant role in strengthening the strategic partnership between the United States and the State of Israel.”

JFNA said that Cheney “maintained enduring relationships with Jewish communal leaders and institutions, engaging in serious dialogue on matters of global security and the protection of Jewish communities worldwide,” “demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the security of Israel” and helped expand military ties between the U.S. and Israel.

AIPAC said in a statement that Cheney, in his various roles, “worked to strengthen the ties between” the United States and Israel and was “a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel partnership.”

The Republican Jewish Coalition praised Cheney as “an American patriot and an unwavering friend of Israel and the Jewish community.”

“Vice President Cheney had a substantial role in meeting the greatest challenges our country faced in the last 40 years, including 9/11,” RJC Chairman Norm Coleman and CEO Matt Brooks said. “He understood the threats against the U.S. and the valuable role of U.S. allies, including Israel, in combatting them.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said that Cheney’s “intellect, experience, and resolve made America safer” throughout his years in government service.

“As grave threats to our security continue to loom, his commitment to American leadership will remain a lesson,” McConnell continued.

In the latter years of his life, Cheney stood staunchly by his daughter, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), as she emerged as one of the most vocal critics of President Donald Trump in the Republican Party following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Like his daughter, Cheney endorsed former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, describing Trump as a threat to democracy.

One thing Betsy Sheerr knows for sure is that most Democratic lawmakers still believe in Israel’s right to exist. She also knows that needing to reestablish this basic fact may not be a good sign for her party, and, more broadly, for American support for Israel.

“I can’t believe the bar is so low that that’s where we have to start,” said Sheerr, a longtime Democratic activist and a board member of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. 

That’s the position in which many pro-Israel Democratic advocates find themselves as they begin to take stock of the domestic political damage wrought by Israel’s two-year war with Hamas that followed the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks. 

Unlike naysayers on the right who suggest Democrats have abandoned Israel — a claim made frequently by President Donald Trump — the Jewish activists and communal leaders who advocate for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and for U.S. aid to Israel still insist that support for the Jewish state remains bipartisan, and that congressional Democrats remain broadly pro-Israel. That proposition faced its toughest test during a two-year war, when Democrats became increasingly sympathetic to the Palestinians as Israel’s effort to eradicate Hamas left the Gaza Strip in ruins and claimed thousands of lives.

As a fragile ceasefire holds, Jewish Democrats see an opportunity to reengage party activists and elected officials who have grown frustrated with Israel’s actions in Gaza. 

Jewish Insider spoke to more than a dozen fundraisers, activists and professionals in the pro-Israel space, most with a long history of involvement in Democratic politics. Their pitch to Democrats at this precarious moment involves two parts: First, push to make Trump’s peace plan a reality. Second, ensure that Democrats understand that the value of America’s relationship with Israel is independent from the leader of either country — and that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who remains unpopular with the American left, won’t be in power forever. 

“I think ending the war turns the temperature down pretty dramatically,” said Brian Romick, CEO of Democratic Majority for Israel. “Right now, what we’re saying is, no matter where you were in the previous two years, we all need the deal to work, and so being for the deal [and] wanting the deal to work is a pro-Israel position right now, and then you build from there.”

At the start of the war, 34% of Democrats sympathized more with Israel, and 31% sympathized more with Palestinians, according to New York Times polling. New data released last month shows that 54% of Democrats now sympathize more with the Palestinians, compared to only 13% with Israel. That stark shift in public opinion corresponded to more Democratic lawmakers voting to condition American military support for Israel than ever before.

This summer, 55 Democrats in the House co-sponsored legislation that would significantly restrict arms sales to Israel. Twenty-seven Democratic senators voted in July to support a bill put forward by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that aimed to reject Israeli arms sales. The bill failed, but it marked a watershed moment for the party, with more than half of all Democrats voting in support of the measure. Not long ago, voting to condition aid to Israel would have been seen as a red line by pro-Israel groups. But with a growing number of Democrats who have already done so, such threats could ring hollow.

“I do think that there is room to build forward,” said Jeremy Burton, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston, which works closely with Democratic lawmakers in deep-blue Massachusetts. “We have to be secure enough in our own belief in the future and our hope for the future to say ‘OK, if your point was that you’re committed to the long-term project of Israel’s security and safety, and you were looking for short term ways to pressure the government of Israel, then let’s move forward with the long-term project, even if we disagreed with you in the short term.’” 

The pro-Israel lobby AIPAC maintains that it is committed to bipartisanship on Capitol Hill, even as the group has faced sharp criticism from progressive activists — including some who have pressured political candidates to swear off donations from the group. A spokesperson for the organization downplayed the shifting political headwinds, noting that American military aid to Israel continued throughout the war. 

“It is important to separate the noise from anti-Israel extremists of the right and left and actual impact,” AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann told JI. “For example, time and time again Congress has resoundingly rejected the efforts of those extremists to cut defense assistance to Israel.”

AIPAC has a long-standing policy of not criticizing the Israeli government no matter who is in power, and that isn’t shifting. But other pro-Israel advocates believe that approach may not work with Democrats who are fed up with Netanyahu’s governance. 

“We know that can one be critical of certain Israeli government policies and still be pro-Israel, and we also know that’s increasingly the case for many Democrats, just as it is for a majority of Jewish Americans,” said Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. 

“The vast majority of Democrats are far more sympathetic to the people of Israel than its current leadership,” echoed Tyler Gregory, who leads the Bay Area JCRC and works closely with progressive leaders in San Francisco. “We need to bring it to a human level.” 

Andrew Lachman, president of California Jewish Democrats, was more overt in his hope that Israel elects a new leader in its next election, set to take place next October, unless it’s called sooner. 

“If there’s a new change in leadership in Israel, that has the opportunity to be able to reset some of those relationships,” Lachman told JI. 

It’s a sentiment echoed by Sheerr, who regularly interacts with Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “I think a lot of people, both lawmakers and others, are looking forward to the next Israeli elections, frankly, and life after Bibi,” she said. That is, of course, assuming that Netanyahu isn’t reelected — a risky bet given that Netanyahu has held the role through multiple elections since 2009, except for one 18-month stretch.

Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), who is challenging Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) in Massachusetts’ Senate primary next year, said this month that he would return donations from AIPAC, an organization that has previously endorsed him. He told JI last week that he took issue with the group’s “steadfast support for the Netanyahu government.” 

“My views on Israel as an essential partner of the United States and our most important ally in the Middle East have not changed,” Moulton said. 

Markey, for his part, has been one of Israel’s leading critics in the Senate, making next year’s Democratic primary one between a candidate who condemns the leading U.S.-Israel advocacy group and a candidate with a record of voting against military aid to Israel.

Ron Halber, who leads the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington and maintains close ties with Democratic lawmakers in Maryland and Virginia, said that Israeli leaders also have a responsibility to repair ties between Democrats and the Jewish state.

“For Israel to align itself, or for the current government or for advisors to think that working with the Republican Party is the way to the future, is about the dumbest strategic mistake I can imagine,” said Halber. “The bipartisan nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship is the fundamental blanket of Israel’s support in the world.” 

The leftward shift of Democratic lawmakers has come despite advocacy campaigns by major Jewish groups who urged senators to vote against Sanders’ resolutions restricting aid to Israel. But some within the mainstream Jewish community recognize that the longtime approach of offering unequivocal support to Israel’s government is not sustainable. 

“My opinion is that this government is harmful,” said Sam Lauter, a public affairs consultant in San Francisco and Democratic fundraiser who helped create DMFI in 2019. “I used to be one of those people who would be sort of silent about that, because ‘I’m a diaspora Jew, and I don’t get a say.’” 

Halber said he believed that many Democrats supporting Sanders’ bill “did so symbolically,” because they knew it was going to fail. “They were trying to send a message to Israel that this is a bridge too far, when they believed humanitarian aid [to Gaza] was being cut off,” he added.

The “million-dollar question,” according to Ilan Goldenberg, J Street’s vice president of policy, is whether lawmakers’ support for conditioning military assistance to Israel will continue after the war, when they have to vote to approve the annual $3.8 billion security package to Israel. 

“I think it’s going to be, ‘We need accountability, and we need certain behavior that we would like to see,’ and if you’re not getting that out of the Israelis, then a willingness to use more leverage and pressure and accountability,” said Goldenberg, who served as Jewish outreach director on Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign last year. “I think that is where the center of the Democratic Party is likely to settle, which is a very different place from where we were before the start of the war.” 

J Street has supported Sanders’ resolutions restricting arms sales to Israel.

If any of the support for the bills that sought to reject certain weapons sales carries over into the regular appropriations process, it would mark a significant shift. 

“It seems indisputable that the Overton window has shifted dramatically over the last two years in terms of what ‘the left’ broadly deems acceptable about Israel, Zionism and even the Jewish American community,” said Amanda Berman, CEO of the progressive group Zioness. “This kind of rhetoric doesn’t just disappear when the news cycle moves on. That said, the vast majority of liberals and progressives are not uniquely obsessed with Jews or Israel, and have any number of urgent issues of concern.” 

Even as pro-Israel activists seek to rebuild frayed ties with erstwhile allies, they recognize that not everyone should be welcomed back into the tent, even if the tent is bigger than it was before.

“We don’t need to be forgiving or ignoring those who chose to just demonize and be dismissive of our anxieties, our fears, our hopes over the last two years,” said Burton. 

The dust has hardly settled in Gaza, and it is too soon to know what the lasting impact of the war will be. But given that this was Israel’s longest war, and that it played out under scrutiny of the traditional media and social media, “it’s going to be a lot harder to put the genie back in the bottle than previous times,” as one person involved in Jewish philanthropy and Democratic politics quipped. 

A town hall organized by Rep. Wesley Bell (D-MO) last week in St. Louis turned contentious as a large group of demonstrators turned out to heckle the freshman congressman — fresh off a trip to Israel — over his support for the Jewish state. A scuffle later broke out between security guards and some of the demonstrators.

The situation highlights the ongoing antagonism from local far-left activists against Bell, which could foreshadow a primary challenge to the congressman from former Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO), whom Bell unseated, or one of her political allies.

Bell, during the 90-minute town hall, pushed back on accusations from demonstrators that Israel is committing genocide, emphasizing that “Israel was attacked by an openly genocidal terrorist group,” while calling for Hamas’ defeat, the release of hostages, the end of the war and ensuring food aid in Gaza.

Demonstrators shouted as Bell sought to address the crowd, disrupting the event repeatedly and accusing Bell of supporting the killing of children, among a variety of other offenses. Some Bell supporters in the audience — whom local reports described as about half of the crowd — also at times exchanged heated words with the congressman’s critics.

“There’s a lot of folks who don’t want to have the conversation,” Bell said during the event. “They just want to spew what they think is important, but they don’t want to have an actual debate because these are tough issues. So, now we’re going to have the conversation — whether you like it or not.”

Bell told local news channel KSDK that he had expected even more disruptions and that he was willing to meet with critics.

“Congressman Bell came prepared to answer questions, including tough ones, about the issues on the minds of his constituents — from standing up to Trump to helping tornado victims rebuild,” a Bell spokesperson told Jewish Insider. “Even with the disruptions, he made sure to respond to as many questions as possible, and he’s continuing to follow up with those he didn’t reach. That’s the work he’s committed to doing every day.”

Braxton Payne, a St. Louis-based Democratic strategist, told JI he recognized some of the individuals involved in the demonstrations as longtime backers of Bush. He said that the political coalitions supporting and opposing Bell in 2024 have remained largely unchanged since Bell took office.

“You’re still seeing the same bases, cohorts of support” as in the 2024 race, Payne said. “I do think there is a sentiment for someone to run against [Bell] in a primary” with support from the “de-facto Cori Bush base.”

He predicted that the 2026 primary election will see higher-than-average turnout among suburban St. Louis County voters — a development likely to help Bell, who in 2024 won St. Louis County but not the city of St. Louis — given other open seats likely to be on the ballot.

Payne said that a mid-decade redistricting effort by Missouri Republicans is expected to largely leave St. Louis-area congressional seats untouched, if it succeeds. But if the redraw brings more of St. Louis County into Bell’s district, that would also likely help boost his support base.

Bush has publicly kept open the possibility of another run for Congress, saying in June that she wouldn’t provide a timeline for when she would decide whether to run again. Bush recently founded a national PAC, Politivist Action.

Payne said that Bush’s husband’s legal troubles — he was charged with defrauding federal pandemic relief programs — could play into her decision on whether to run again. He added that she has been less present at local political events since leaving office than she was before she became a member of Congress.

Bush did not respond to a request for comment about her plans.

Asked by KSDK about the possibility of a rematch with Bush, Bell said that he wouldn’t address the hypothetical question, but that he is working to support and represent his district daily.

Megan Green, the president of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen, is also rumored to be interested in the seat, local observers said, but said in an email to JI that she is “not running.” Green is a Bush ally who recently accused Israel of genocide and has claimed that AIPAC exercises malicious influence over the Democratic Party.

Bell’s campaign appears to be gearing up early for the possibility of a competitive primary — he has raised nearly $700,000 thus far this cycle.

Stacey Newman, the executive director of the Missouri Alliance Network and a former Democratic state lawmaker who led Jewish outreach for Bell’s 2024 campaign, told JI that Bell’s supporters in the Jewish community expect that the congressman will face a primary challenge, but that it’s not entirely clear yet from whom.

Newman said that, given some of the names floated as potential challengers to Bell, the race would likely rehash the same issues of the 2024 campaign, which included a heavy focus on Israel policy.

Newman said that the unruly town hall had further contributed to unease and fear in the St. Louis-area Jewish community about the community’s safety, in the wake of the firebombing of cars in a residential neighborhood targeting a Jewish family whose son served in the IDF. No suspects have been announced or arrested in the case, which is being investigated as an antisemitic hate crime, and local Jewish groups are offering a $30,000 reward.

The events at the town hall follow a series of other aggressive anti-Israel demonstrations in the area, she noted.

“The Jewish community is on edge in terms of our safety,” Newman said.

Rabbi Pesach Wolicki, the executive director of Israel365 Action, said he felt compelled to arrange a high-profile visit to Israel this month for a group of young MAGA influencers because of what he perceives to be Israel’s failure to appeal to the Make America Great Again movement amid slippage in support for the Jewish state from younger conservatives. 

“Let’s put it frankly, the way it came about was that the MAGA movement did not have any authentic voices out of Israel communicating to it in this war,” Wolicki told Jewish Insider in an interview on Wednesday about the trip. “Once you understand the language [that MAGA supporters speak], you realize how much 90% of the Jewish world does not understand it.” 

Israel365 Action, a subset of Israel365, the advocacy group that describes itself as an “Orthodox Jewish institution that believes that Jews and Christians must respect one another,” began organizing the visit late last year, after Wolicki was introduced to a group of pro-Israel individuals involved in managing and promoting conservative influencers. Wolicki declined to reveal the names of the individuals, whom he met in December at America Fest, an annual event put on by the MAGA-aligned campus advocacy group Turning Point USA.

“We met a couple guys there who are involved in the social media business and in the MAGA world, involved with a lot of creators and accounts on the business end of things, who are pro-Israel and concerned. We decided to work together and create a trip for social media influencers from this space to show them Israel, and they would do the recruiting, because they’re in that space,” Wolicki told JI. 

“I’d be there as the persona that I occupy in the movement, as this Orthodox rabbi in MAGA, and we’re going to do this VIP trip to Israel for social media influencers. Israel365 would put the trip on, we’d find the funding for it, and they would recruit the participants. That’s how this came to be,” he continued. 

Some of that funding came through the Israeli Foreign Ministry, which was revealed in July to have approved an $86,000 contract with Israel365 Action to bankroll the trip. 

Among the influencers who took part in the delegation were Jayne Zirkle, Xavier DeRousseau, Cam Higby, Fabian Garcia, Lance Johnston and Avery Daye.

Johnston, who goes by LanceVideos on social media, told JI that he was introduced to the idea of traveling to the Jewish state through Higby, a close personal friend and fellow influencer attending the trip. Johnston said Higby had put him in touch with the trip organizers, whom he told last December that he had never been to Israel but would “love to go at some point.”

“They said, ‘You know what? Maybe we could figure out a trip.’ Things just kind of happened from there. We just got into a bunch of group chats and organized everything. We invited more influencers on the trip and it got really big. It was really, really cool to see. It didn’t take very long for everything to get into place. It all kind of spawned at a dinner where I literally said, ‘Hey, are the girls hot in Israel?’ They said yes, so I said I was down to go,” Johnston said. 

Once there, the group drove from Jerusalem to northern Israel to visit the Golan Heights and the border with Syria, and later in the week toured the sites of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in southern Israel later. Israel365 sponsored a barbecue at the IDF’s Yahalom base at the conclusion of the trip where they were joined by soldiers who had served in Gaza, including an elite combat engineer who gave them a tour of the grounds. 

The influencers also met with an array of politicians, journalists and everyday Israelis, including U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee; Israeli Diaspora Affairs Minister Amichai Chikli; and Khaled Abu Toameh, a journalist who was previously the Palestinian affairs correspondent for The Jerusalem Post. 

Wolicki noted that trip organizers encouraged all those invited to meet with the influencers to spend the day with their group and engage socially, allowing participants to form meaningful connections with individual Israelis.

“One of the big things that we did on this trip was that everywhere we went, we tried as hard as we could to just simply add in people to the trip, not guides, but first person stories from real people,” Wolicki told JI. “These are people who are communicators of stories. These are social media influencers. So when I’m thinking about the itinerary, [I’m asking myself] what people can I add that tell Israel’s story?”

Johnston said his experience with Israeli soldiers at the barbecue disabused him of prejudices he previously held about the IDF, believing them to be anti-Christian. 

“We actually had lunch with these guys and just hung out. They were really, really nice to us and it was a really, really, a stark contrast of what I’d been told online. People were literally saying to me in America: ‘I do not trust the IDF, and I believe if I met them in person, they might beat me up or hurt me just because I’m an American or even Christian.’ I was openly wearing my Christian crosses, and I have a Christian tattoo right on my arm, and I was wearing a short sleeve shirt. They didn’t mention it at all,” the Gen Z influencer said. 

“They don’t care that we’re Christian or Americans. They were just like guys our age fighting in a war. And I would like to go out and grab a beer with them. They were just kind of like homies. It was really, really cool. And it’s like, completely different than what the lefties and even the far right are saying about these people. They’re not that,” he added. 

Zirkle told JI that getting to meet “many locals from different walks of life … really showed what a culturally rich country it is. It’s very much a melting pot, which I think is a side that isn’t often shown in Western media.”

News of the trip began circulating earlier this summer, after the Foreign Ministry contract was confirmed by Israeli media, prompting swift backlash against some of the influencers from within the MAGA movement. “They got backlash from the followers for coming on this trip. They’ve been subjected to attacks for coming on this trip, and that was a subject of conversation among them throughout the trip, was the heat that they were getting from their audiences,” Wolicki explained. 

Zirkle, for instance, was fired from Steve Bannon’s “WarRoom” podcast for her participation in the trip. 

“Jane Zirkle was on Steve’s staff for three-and-a-half years, and she had previously worked for Rudy Giuliani. She’s a well-known figure in MAGA. She was also a field reporter for Bannon, besides running his social media, and was one of the guest hosts who rotated hosting the show while Steve was in prison last year for four months. Because she came on the trip, Steve fired her,” Wolicki said. 

Wolicki said that Bannon’s ire stemmed from the trip being funded by the Israeli Foreign Ministry and noted that Bannon had stopped having him as a guest to discuss Middle East developments in recent months, as the one-time Trump advisor soured on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for striking Iran’s nuclear facilities.. Prior to this summer, Bannon frequently had Wolicki on “WarRoom,” including to criticize prominent right-wing figures such as Tucker Carlson for their anti-Israel leanings. 

Asked about her firing, Zirkle told JI in a statement, “Regarding ‘WarRoom’: I chose to go to Israel and I’m proud to have gone to Israel.” She declined to discuss the matter further. 

“Everywhere we went, we witnessed the resilience of the Israeli spirit. From its founding, Israel has been surrounded by those who wish to destroy it. Yet, instead of being defined by trauma, Israel chooses to be defined by life,” she said when asked for her reflections on the visit. 

A spokesperson for Bannon and “WarRoom” did not respond to JI’s request for comment on Zirkle’s firing or his objections to the Israel365 trip. 

Despite the blowback for some attendees, Wolicki said he witnessed several of the influencers change their attitudes toward the Jewish state in real time. 

“As the trip went on, I kept hearing over and over again, in different ways, from different participants, that, ‘Oh my gosh, everything I’ve been told about Israel and the media is a lie.’ Along with that, which sounds like a positive, there’s also the realization about how bad Israel is at getting its message out,” Wolicki said. “There was a sense throughout the trip that they were witnessing things that other people are not necessarily seeing, and that was meaningful to them.”

Johnston was one of those participants. The Gen Z influencer told JI that he “used to be pretty anti-Israel before the trip” but said he had evolved his views during the visit. 

“I wasn’t antisemitic or anything, I just didn’t want to send a lot of money to Israel to fight wars that apparently we’re not supposed to be involved in,” Johnston explained of his prior opinion. “Now I see that sending them military equipment, not necessarily sending troops on the ground because the IDF is actually doing pretty good of a job, I’d like to say not a perfect job because nobody’s perfect, but they’re doing a pretty good job using our equipment. I’m now more like, I’m fine with sending them weapons.”

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) is rebuking a top mayoral candidate in Minneapolis, far-left state Sen. Omar Fateh, who has recently faced criticism for employing campaign staffers who have glorified Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks, blamed Israel for the war in Gaza and called for the destruction of the Jewish state, among other extreme comments.

In a statement to Jewish Insider on Wednesday, a spokesperson for Klobuchar, who is backing Fateh’s chief rival, Mayor Jacob Frey, said that the senator “strongly and immediately condemned the Hamas terrorist attack, and condemns any statements to the contrary.”

“These comments are outrageous and have no place in our politics,” the spokesperson, Jane Meyer, said of the staffers’ remarks, which were unearthed by JI last week. “She has spoken out against antisemitism for years. She has endorsed the mayor and did so months ago.”

Klobuchar, who along with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz is the most high-profile Democratic official supporting Frey’s campaign for a third term, had until now remained silent with regard to Fateh, a 35-year-old democratic socialist whose insurgent bid has drawn comparisons to Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor.

Meyer declined a request for comment from JI last Friday but ultimately shared a statement this week after Fateh drew backlash from, among others, the local Jewish Community Relations Council, which called into question his commitment to addressing Jewish safety concerns as he tolerates staffers who “traffic in antisemitism” and act as “apologists” for Hamas.

Fateh, who pledged to boycott the JCRC in a recent candidate questionnaire solicited by the Twin Cities chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, has not yet addressed the staffers’ rhetoric, significantly more extreme than his own public stances on Israel and Gaza.

While he has accused Israel of genocide and voiced support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, Fateh’s communications manager, Ayana Smith-Kooiman, has endorsed the Hamas attacks as a justified act of “resistance” and declared that Israel “does not have a ‘right’ to exist” and “must be dismantled,” among several other now-deleted social media posts reviewed by JI.

In addition, David Gilbert-Pederson, a local political activist and City Council aide who has been listed as a Fateh campaign staffer in filings, has unreservedly praised Hamas’ violence against Israel. Speaking in December 2023, Gilbert-Pederson celebrated “what happened collectively for the people of Palestine on Oct. 7” and said supporters of the Palestinian cause must “stand in unconditional solidarity with those resisting oppression.”

Despite Klobuchar’s new condemnation of such rhetoric, most of Frey’s leading allies in the hotly contested mayoral race have so far refrained from commenting on the situation. Representatives for Walz have not responded to multiple requests for comment on the staffers or Fateh’s acceptance of their views.

Prominent Democratic officials who have not taken sides in the race have likewise declined to weigh in on the matter.

Fateh’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday. 

The state senator is set to host a “Jews for Fateh” fundraiser early next month, according to an event page, which notes that attendees will learn about his “campaign’s movement to build a city that leaves no one behind.”

Rep. Laura Gillen (D-NY) said she came away from her recent visit to Israel feeling resolute in her determination to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship and support the Jewish state in its efforts to bring all remaining hostages in Gaza home.

Gillen, a freshman lawmaker who represents a Nassau County, Long Island, swing district with a significant Jewish population, took part in a delegation of 14 House Democrats to the Jewish state last week. The trip was sponsored by the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation, which organized a similar visit to Israel for House Republicans the week prior that overlapped for several days with the Democratic trip. 

“We need to continue to strengthen the relationship between the United States and Israel,” Gillen told Jewish Insider in an interview on Monday. “The most important thing is: We need to be consistently supporting Israel. Hamas needs to end this war. It needs to give the hostages back. That’s something that can happen today, and the world needs to remember that.”

The Long Island lawmaker noted that the trip, her first visit to Israel as a member of Congress, highlighted the nonpartisan nature of support for Israel in the United States and sent a message that the vast majority of Americans are behind the Jewish state. 

“Just being on this trip with colleagues from the other side, having the opportunity to sit down and talk about some of the things that we saw, the conversations we were having with various elected officials and various nonprofit groups and business leaders in Israel, and talking to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle about what we’re sharing, the shared experience of visiting Israel, I think is really important going forward,” Gillen said.

“I think it’s important for the world to see this, that the detractors are the extremes on both sides of the aisle, that the majority, I believe, of people see the value and the special nature of our relationship with our ally Israel,” she continued. 

The trip comes amid increasing tensions between the Israeli government and some of the most vocal pro-Israel Democrats on Capitol Hill, many of whom have expressed concern over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israel’s recently finalized plans to expand the war and conduct a military takeover of Gaza City.

Gillen said that the response from constituents to her trip has been overwhelmingly positive. “The folks that I have been speaking with, they’ve been glad that I went to Israel. They were glad that I could share stories about what I saw going on there, the stories about how aid is actually getting into Gaza, the challenges that are faced, the stories about meeting with the hostages’ families,” she told JI, adding, “people are losing sight of what is going on with this conflict.”

Placing blame for the war in the hands of Hamas, Gillen noted, “We have to keep reminding the world that that is why people are suffering.”

The House Democrat said that the most consistent concerns she heard from Israeli officials and citizens were focused on securing the release of the remaining hostages in Gaza. 

“The No. 1 feeling that I got is [that] people want the hostages home. Everywhere you look you see pictures of the hostages, whether it’s arriving in the airport where their photographs are up to just on a fence outside a private home. That’s the most overwhelming sentiment, I think, is we need to get the hostages home, and we need to get them back alive,” Gillen said.

Asked about her sense of public sentiment among Israelis nearly two years since the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, Gillen replied: “I’m always in awe of the resilience of the Israeli people.”

Gillen pointed to her tour of Kibbutz Nir Oz, one of the communities in southern Israel targeted on Oct. 7, and said her guide “was telling us the stories and the horrible things that happened all around her that day, to her neighbors and friends, but she also talked about how they’re going to rebuild. They’re going to come back, and they’re going to be stronger than they were before.”

In addition to seeing the sites of the Oct. 7 attack, the group toured the Old City of Jerusalem and visited the Western Wall and Yad Vashem — the World Holocaust Remembrance Center. The lawmakers also traveled to northern Israel and the Golan Heights. They received several briefings from IDF officials, including one on Iranian threats to Israel from IDF Maj. Gen. Tamir Hayman, former Military Intelligence Directorate chief. 

The trip featured meetings with hostage families and senior Israeli officials, including with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Isaac Herzog and Opposition Leader Yair Lapid. The group also met with U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, whom Gillen’s office said she “had the honor of introducing” to her colleagues on the trip, as well as hostage families. 

Regarding a visit to Ashdod Port to see the World Food Program’s aid collection operation on the ground, Gillen told JI, “it was a top priority for our delegation to find out what is going on in terms of humanitarian aid getting into Gaza.”

“One of things we took away is [that] it’s very challenging because they are trying to distribute food in an active war zone, so that makes it harder to get the aid to the folks who need it most. However, there is aid going into Gaza. There’s agreement there, and that the challenges in getting aid are caused by Hamas,” Gillen said. 

“Hamas’ military operations are hurting the ability of all aid organizations to get the food to the people who need it, but certainly aid is getting into Gaza,” she continued. “There’s agreement also that we need to, or they need to, increase the number of distribution sites, but that’s being made more challenging because of Hamas’ activities.”

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders returned to the U.S. on Sunday following a nearly weeklong trip to Israel aimed at boosting Arkansas’ diplomatic and economic ties with the Jewish state.

The trade delegation was Sanders’ first official visit to Israel as governor and her first time visiting the Jewish state since her father, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, was confirmed to his role in April. 

“It was an amazing trip,” Sanders told Jewish Insider in an interview. “The thing that stands out and is so amazing to see in person is just the resiliency of the people of Israel and just their steadfast commitment. Getting to visit with people that are living the day-to-day challenges that they are and yet, they’re still showing up for work, they’re still going to school, they’re still running their businesses and continuing on in the face of some pretty uphill, significant challenges is amazing.”

“I’m honored I got the chance to go and thankful for what I think is a great future in partnership and collaboration between Arkansas and the State of Israel in a lot of different ways,” she said.

Asked about her father’s tenure as ambassador thus far, Sanders remarked that Amb. Huckabee viewed the position as “a calling” rather than a job, given his longstanding connection to the Jewish state.

“Not only does he have a sense of joy about the job, but he has a true passion. For him, it is not a job, it’s a calling. He is somebody who has always led with conviction, but I don’t think that there’s any role he’s taken on where there’s a greater sense of conviction than this one,” Sanders said of her father, who served as governor of Arkansas from 1996 to 2007.

Sanders noted that her father’s appointment as ambassador to Israel was “a bit of a culmination of everything else he’s done in his life, from being a pastor to a governor to a communicator. It is a role that kind of encompasses a lot of different parts of his background, and something that he is genuinely very honored to be able to do.”

“Several members of the government leadership in Israel all commented [on what] an amazing job he was doing, how much they appreciate what he’s doing,” she explained, adding that, “One in particular even joked that the only bad thing about my dad in that role is that he may love [the country] more than even some of the Israelis.”

During her trip, Sanders met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Economy Minister Nir Barkat, and was given a tour of the Knesset by Speaker Amir Ohana. The governor took part in a tour of the Ariel settlement in the West Bank alongside House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and a delegation of House lawmakers. Her first stop upon landing in Israel was Jerusalem, visiting the Western Wall to pray with her mother, former Arkansas First Lady Janet Huckabee, who moved to the Jewish state following her husband’s confirmation as ambassador. 

During Sanders’ summit with Netanyahu, given that “components of Israel’s Iron Dome are produced in Arkansas … the governor expressed interest in expanding that partnership to support both Arkansas’ economy and Israel’s national security,” according to a readout from her office. 

Asked if Netanyahu or others offered any suggestions of ways American governors could strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship, Sanders told JI, “Generally, they appreciated us being there and showing such public support. Obviously, my dad is very vocally supportive, and they certainly appreciate that. I think the biggest thing was how much just showing up makes a difference, and being willing to not back down despite the fact that there is criticism.”

“[The Israelis] appreciated us and our delegation making the effort, not just to put something on Twitter or Instagram, but to come there in person and show our commitment to the relationship. Also, we don’t just want to show up, but we want to be able to work with Israeli companies to bring business into our state, to increase trade,” the Arkansas governor said. 

Sanders noted that her administration had “done a lot when it comes to public legislation to support and show our commitment, whether it was signing the Judea and Samaria Act, where we recognized the area west of the Jordan [River] as Judea and Samaria, the way that God intended it to be. We’ve also invested significantly in pension funds and Israeli bonds in our state and a number of other things.” 

“I didn’t have to tell them [the Israelis] that we had done those things. They knew. They’d been paying attention and they appreciated the things that we were doing and the way that we were showing support, most recently by coming to Israel and being there in person,” she said. 

While in Israel, Sanders signed an Arkansas-Israel Memorandum of Understanding aimed at strengthening the trade relationship between the two. Little Rock counts Israel as one of its biggest trading partners, exporting over $150 million in goods to the Jewish state last year. 

“Our goal with the MOU was to deepen the partnerships between Arkansas and Israel, especially in some of the areas that Israel is so advanced in: aerospace and defense, ag tech, energy and manufacturing. Those are also spaces that our state is heavily leaning into,”  Sanders told JI.  

“Agriculture is our number one industry, aerospace and defense are number one exports. Energy and manufacturing are key cornerstones in our state’s economy. So there’s a great synergy between our state and the State of Israel. Being able to collaborate further is good for both of us, and it will continue to facilitate the exchange of information and research between both sides and set the groundwork for a significant amount of future economic cooperation,” she added.

In addition to visiting Israel, Sanders briefly touched down in the United Arab Emirates to meet with government officials and leading aerospace and defense companies. 

For European leaders who are ratcheting up pressure on Israel to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the Jewish state’s moves to pause military activity to allow a freer flow of humanitarian aid and begin airdrops of aid are “steps in the right direction,” the German foreign minister said on Sunday.

But the aid crisis is inextricably linked, observers say, to a much larger and even thornier issue — a deal to end the grinding 21-month war with Hamas and a release of the hostages. Until such a deal is struck, the pressure from Europe, and from some inside Israel, likely won’t ease. And it could worsen, with some experts warning that European sanctions on Israel aren’t out of the question.

Daniel Shek, a former Israeli ambassador to France and a member of the Hostage Families Forum’s diplomatic team, said that the aid airdrops are “a result of international pressure and not sudden altruism.”

However, Shek said, they are “like Tylenol for a cancer patient. Surgery is needed, meaning the end of the war.” 

A spokesperson for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that he is “prepared to increase the pressure if progress [on a ceasefire and humanitarian aid] is not made.”

French President Emmanuel Macron announced last week that his country would recognize a Palestinian state. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot argued that the move “proves [Hamas] wrong. It supports the side of peace against that of war,” because “Hamas has always rejected the two-state solution.” 

The terrorist group praised France’s “positive step in the right direction.” 

England and Germany declined to join France in recognizing a Palestinian state, but their leaders released a statement with Macron focusing on the “humanitarian catastrophe” in Gaza and calling for “the most basic needs of the civilian population, including access to water and food [to be] met without further delay” and for Israel “to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid.” 

Israel has argued that it is not restricting the flow of aid into Gaza, but that the U.N. refuses to cooperate with the U.S. and Israel supported Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to distribute it.

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that he is “unequivocal” in his support for a Palestinian state, but that recognition must come as “part of a wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution and lasting security for Palestinians and Israelis. This is the way to ensure it is a tool of maximum utility.” 

The IDF noted that “responsibility for food distribution to the population lies with the U.N. and international aid organizations. Therefore, the U.N. and international organizations are expected to improve the effectiveness of aid distribution and to ensure that the aid does not reach Hamas.”

Israel initiated on Sunday 10-hour “pauses” in the coming days in areas of Gaza in which there are no IDF ground troops, daily until further notice, “aimed at improving the humanitarian response in the Gaza Strip and to refute the false claim of deliberate starvation.” 

In addition to 28 airdrops on the first day, the IDF established corridors to allow the safe movement of U.N. convoys of food and medicine. The military also noted that “responsibility for food distribution to the population lies with the U.N. and international aid organizations. Therefore, the U.N. and international organizations are expected to improve the effectiveness of aid distribution and to ensure that the aid does not reach Hamas.”

Starmer, however, said after the airdrops were announced on Saturday that “Israel must allow aid in over land…The situation is desperate.” 

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said that “humanitarian pauses and aid deliveries into Gaza are steps in the right direction, results of many direct conversations in the last few days. Yet the situation remains unbearable: Hamas must release all hostages, a comprehensive ceasefire is badly needed.” 

Starmer reportedly plans to ask President Donald Trump to return to ceasefire talks with Hamas, during the president’s visit to Scotland on Monday. A source in his office told The Guardian over the weekend that Starmer will “discuss further with [Trump] what more can be done to secure the ceasefire urgently, bring an end to the unspeakable suffering and starvation in Gaza and free the hostages who have been held so cruelly for so long.” 

The U.S. and Israel withdrew their teams from the negotiations in Doha, Qatar, last week, after Hamas rejected a ceasefire and hostage deal by making new demands in areas that had previously been resolved. U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff said that Washington was looking for “alternative options,” which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later echoed.

Germany similarly remained concerned about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, with Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul saying that “humanitarian pauses and aid deliveries into Gaza are steps in the right direction, results of many direct conversations in the last few days. Yet the situation remains unbearable: Hamas must release all hostages, a comprehensive ceasefire is badly needed.” 

Merz and Netanyahu spoke on the phone on Sunday. Following the call, Merz said he asked Netanyahu “to do everything in his power to bring about an immediate ceasefire and called on him to allow urgently needed humanitarian aid to reach the starving civilian population in Gaza without delay.” 

Israel is taking a different approach to each major European capital and its statements and actions on Israel, a Foreign Ministry source told Jewish Insider.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry summoned the French charge d’affaires for a demarche by Director-General Eden Bar-Tal on Sunday. A statement from the ministry said that France “chose to harm Israel in its most difficult hour…France directly harmed the negotiations to return the hostages and for a ceasefire and all future diplomatic negotiations.”

Soon after Macron’s announcement on Thursday, Netanyahu said that it “rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became. A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it. Let’s be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel; they seek a state instead of Israel.”

If the war continues, Daniel Shek, a former Israeli ambassador to France and a member of the Hostage Families Forum’s diplomatic team, warned, “we could find ourselves under real pressure, such as sanctions, even from friendly countries that blocked [such steps] until now. Israel is isolating itself.”

Though Berlin has continued to make critical statements, the Foreign Ministry source indicated that Jerusalem still views Germany as a largely supportive country. 

The source noted that while there was significant domestic pressure over Germany’s Israel policy, it has not backed down, such as last week when Berlin declined to join a letter of 28 countries calling to end the war immediately. 

In addition, Germany did not support moves to reexamine Israel’s “association agreement” with the EU, which could result in a chill in relations between Israel and its largest trade partner. Changes in the association agreement would require consensus from all 28 EU member states, several of whom would be unlikely to support downgrading ties with Israel.

Wadephul and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar have met three times since the former entered office three months ago. In one of the meetings he said that Germany would not cut off arms sales to Israel. 

Emmanuel Navon, an international relations lecturer at Tel Aviv University and fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Security Studies, said that the aid drops would likely be enough to stop Germany from taking action against Israel.

“I find it hard to believe that Germany, who we have very close ties with, would do something like [downgrade the association agreement] unless Israel has totally cut off humanitarian aid … For German public agreement, you need aid flowing into Gaza,” he added.

Shek was skeptical that Germany would follow Macron in recognizing a Palestinian state, but said “even Germany is showing signs of impatience and urgency,” and that there are other steps that Berlin could take.

The former ambassador also said he thought that canceling the EU-Israel Association Agreement was unlikely, because Hungary and Eastern European states would not support it. However, he said that the Brussels bureaucracy could slow-walk agreements and cooperation with Jerusalem in areas that often depend on EU grants such as scientific research and culture.

If the war continues, Shek warned, “we could find ourselves under real pressure, such as sanctions, even from friendly countries that blocked [such steps] until now. Israel is isolating itself.”

That being said, Shek and Navon doubted that the latest moves from Europe actually constituted pressure on Jerusalem. 

Shek dismissed angry Israeli reactions to Macron’s “recognition of a virtual Palestinian state state that doesn’t exist … Those reactions are only aimed at the Israeli voter and have no value in international relations.” 

“We need to say Hamas is looting and the U.N. won’t distribute the aid — we don’t need to wait to be accused of starving [Gazans] to say it,” said Emmanuel Navon, an international relations lecturer at Tel Aviv University and fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Security Studies. “The problem is that we wait to be attacked and then we react. Once the accusation is out, it’s hard to correct.”

Navon noted that other G7 countries were not on board with Macron’s initiatives, even those with left-wing governments like the U.K. and Canada.

“Macron has brought relations with Israel to the low of the early to mid 1970s … when France was graded as hostile in Israel’s foreign policy,” Navon said. “It will take years to repair after [Macron].” 

Navon said that Israel needs to be more proactive in communicating what is happening in Gaza: “We need to say Hamas is looting and the U.N. won’t distribute the aid — we don’t need to wait to be accused of starving [Gazans] to say it. The problem is that we wait to be attacked and then we react. Once the accusation is out, it’s hard to correct.”

In addition, Navon said, “Netanyahu needs to get his act together and tell his ministers to shut up or take away their phones.”

He referred to remarks by Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu in a radio interview last week that “the government is racing ahead to wipe out Gaza … All of Gaza will be Jewish.” 

“The prime minister has to have better control of rogue members of his government and party who are causing us terrible damage,” Navon added.

Shek, however, said the way to improve Israel’s relations with Europe and the rest of the world is to end the war in Gaza.

The former ambassador argued that the issue is not one of Israel doing a poor job at explaining the situation to the world: “If all of these countries have reached the conclusion that the war needs to end, then Israel needs to have a discussion with them to find out how they can contribute to a better reality after the war … We need to just get into a conversation about an exit strategy … which is something that the Israeli government has refused to do from Oct. 8, 2023, to this day.” 

Since his arrival in Israel in April, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has made his mark as the first evangelical U.S. ambassador to Israel — and possibly the most effusive in his remarks about the Jewish state.

That may be why a leaked letter he wrote to Israeli Interior Minister Moshe Arbel last week, expressing “profound disappointment” that an issue delaying work visas for Christian organizations had gone unresolved and suggesting that Israelis may be treated in kind by the U.S., drew so much attention.

A day after the letter leaked, the ambassador visited Taybeh, a Palestinian village in the West Bank where there had been a fire in a field near a church, writing on X that “desecrating a church, mosque or synagogue is a crime against humanity and God,” and “I will demand those responsible be held accountable.” With Taybeh church leaders blaming settlers, Huckabee’s comments were interpreted in many media accounts as doing the same, though he later clarified that he was not attributing the fire to anyone. 

But with the visa issue resolved and the world’s attention on the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the latest round of collapsed negotiations for a ceasefire and hostage-release deal, Huckabee was back to standing firmly behind Israel in an interview with Jewish Insider in his office at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem on Thursday. With an a guitar hanging on the wall behind him emblazoned with an American flag and President Donald Trump’s slogan “make America great again,” Huckabee pinned the humanitarian issues in Gaza on Hamas and the U.N and the failure of negotiations on Hamas, and was critical of other Western countries that have come out against Israel, accusing them of emboldening the Gazan terrorist group. 

The interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Jewish Insider: There’s a lot of pressure on Israel over humanitarian aid in Gaza and claims that residents of Gaza are starving. Israel says that they are letting more food in but no one is distributing it, while much of the world doesn’t believe that. I want to ask you: Do you think there is really starvation in Gaza? What is really happening?

Ambassador Mike Huckabee: This very morning, I had a visit from someone who returned yesterday from three days in Gaza. He firsthand went and saw the [Gaza Humanitarian Foundation] feeding sites, talked to people, not only from the staffing and the distribution, but he talked to people in Gaza … He came to the conclusion, first of all, that absolute lies that are being told, not only about GHF and what they’re doing, but are also being told about the deprivation. 

There are clearly people who need food and medicine. That’s not a doubt. But the biggest reason that people are not getting the food and medicine they need is that Hamas is doing its best to cause the people to suffer. They want to get the photos of the most disastrous consequences possible. 

The photos that I also saw, which were very disturbing but also revealing, [were of] hundreds and hundreds of pallets of food that are sitting out in the sun ready to be distributed, but the U.N. won’t move them. Hundreds of trucks filled with food and medicine, and the U.N. claims that they’re trying to help. No, they’re not. They are as much a part of the problem, if not the biggest part of the problem there is. And this food could be distributed right now, but the U.N. isn’t doing it. The NGOs aren’t doing it, and the World Food Program isn’t doing it, because they just drop it off. Then, basically, they’re waiting on Hamas to come and steal it so [the group] can turn around and sell it to the people that ought to be getting it for free. It is a scam. 

It is a disgrace and an outrage that the story that is being told is that GHF is killing people, and they’re not. They haven’t fired one round at anybody … It’s simply not true. It is sadly being reported sometimes because Hamas will release a news story and the Associated Press, CNN, The Washington Post, will gobble it up. They’ll print it without any verification … That’s what Israel is up against. It’s what the U.S. is up against every single day, with really, really horrible misinformation about what’s happening.

JI: Why do you think countries that purport to be friends of Israel and the U.S. — 26 countries signed a letter to Israel about the aid including the U.K., Canada, France — are believing Hamas?

MH: It’s hard for me to understand why they would do that without doing a little better job of verifying the information. If they would, they would have a totally different picture…

The other day there was the story of the 26 countries that came out and did this condemnation of Israel. If you read the news release, it’s all about Israel, all about what they haven’t done right, and a lot of the things in the story are just untrue. The biggest just shocker of it all, was that there was one brief mention of the fact that the war was started by Hamas on Oct. 7, as a passing reference, without really giving the qualifier that this war should have ended on Oct. the 8th, but Hamas doesn’t want it to, and they’re doing everything they can to make sure it doesn’t…

I’ve been shocked that very few other nations and even nonprofit organizations have been willing to stand up and help in the distribution of the food through the GHF, because the whole model was based on … No. 1, get food to people who are hungry, and No. 2, do it in a way that it doesn’t get stolen by Hamas. That’s been accomplished; over 85 million meals now have been served and continues to operate at almost 2 million meals a day.

It hasn’t been perfect. There have been hiccups, but [that happens] when you have that many people coming to a site and trying to get that much food out to people. Heck, you can go to Walmart on Christmas Eve … and it’s bedlam. Sometimes you stand in the long line and sometimes they ran out of what you wanted, but that’s true in the most efficient retailer on the planet. This is being done out in the middle of a desert for heaven’s sakes, and has really worked pretty doggone good. 

Well, we just want people to get the truth and to get the food, but we don’t want Hamas to steal it, which is what they have done through the U.N. model, which has been an absolute disaster. 

Maybe the U.N. is more interested in preserving the machinery of the U.N. than they are in feeding people. And I know that sounds harsh, but I absolutely am on the record for that, because when I see just thousands of pallets, thousands of tons of food sitting that could be consumed by people, it’s sitting there because the U.N. doesn’t really have any incentive to go out and actually get it to the people. They can just present that ‘We carried X number of trucks in.’ How many people got fed from that? Bigger question is, how many of those trucks or pallets are going to be looted by Hamas, who will then sell it to the people that are hungry?

JI: Do you think that there’s something that Israel needs to be doing differently at this point with regards to humanitarian aid? 

MH: Get their message out more strongly. You know, they have a good message about what they’re trying to do. They’re trying to protect the people who are delivering the food. Food isn’t being delivered by the IDF. That was one of the key points; they didn’t want the military giving the food, because there’s a distrust, and we understand that, so we brought our own contractors in. But you can’t give food away in a war zone without having the military who’s prosecuting the war involved, at least on the perimeter, so that they can make sure that there’s a secure route in and a secure route out … Israel has a much better story to tell than the world is hearing, and it’s very frustrating, especially when so-called allies are attacking Israel and not even really mentioning Hamas. 

JI: Hamas is degraded, but it’s still a force in Gaza and it’s still holding hostages. We’re talking a day after Hamas essentially rejected the temporary ceasefire and hostage deal being offered. But there was talk before that of turning the proposed 60-day ceasefire into a permanent one, even though Hamas has not been eliminated. How does the Trump administration see things going forward?

MH: The president has said repeatedly, without any equivocation, that Hamas can’t stay, and they can’t govern. … And frankly, it’s the right message. They can’t stay, they can’t govern. It would be like saying the Nazis can stay in Germany after World War II and have a hand in governing the future; nobody would have thought that was a good idea … Hamas built tunnels bigger than the London Underground so they could kill Jews. It’s a horrible, horrible story, and people need to put the blame where it falls, and that’s on Hamas and not on Israel.

JI: The negotiations seem to have reached a dead end. What more do you think that could be done to get the hostages home?

MH: If everyone in the world puts enough pressure on Hamas and says it won’t be just Israel and the U.S. coming to get you, it’ll be the whole world coming to get you. It’s like in the movie “Tombstone” and Wyatt Earp says, “I’m coming for you, and hell is coming with me.” That’s the kind of message that we need to say. The problem is Israel has made concession after concession. They have made offer after offer. The U.S. has intervened time and time and time again and gone to, I don’t know how many different talks, meetings and negotiations, but every time you will hear “we’re close,” we think we’re about there, and then Hamas changes all the conditions at the last minute, or just outright rejects them…

[On Wednesday, Hamas] went back to a position that [it] had abandoned in the past. So when there’s not a good faith negotiation going on, and then you have to ask: Whoever thought there was going to be? These are the people that murdered pregnant women in front of their families, and that raped women in front of their children. When people do things like that, these aren’t people you sit down and work out a negotiation to buy a home from or sell a car to. So, while everybody has hopes that this is going to end and soon, all the hostages returned and Hamas is gone, it’s up to Hamas whether or not that’s going to happen.

JI: Do you think the letter from the 26 countries emboldened Hamas to harden its position? 

MH: That’s the real tragedy. It’s not just that they’re condemning Israel, but by condemning Israel and barely mentioning Hamas, they’re empowering Hamas to just keep hanging on. 

There needs to be a collective across-the-whole-globe condemnation of Hamas with this clarity of message that what they’ve done is evil and holding hostages for nearly 700 days can’t be justified under any conditions … The families who have been put through a living hell over this deserve to be relieved. 

JI: What about the Qataris? Do you think that the U.S. is doing enough to put pressure on them? It seems that they are doing everything they can to try to stay on President Trump’s good side.

MH: One thing they could do — if that’s their goal, to be in the president’s good graces — would be to be key in bringing this to a resolve. And I hope they do. I hope they use every influence they have, and they truly have some. I mean, they’ve been housing some of the Hamas leaders since all of this started. And Al Jazeera, which is one of the most despicable propaganda machines in the world, is financed by them…

I’ll leave [the details] to the headquarters in Washington, but nobody would be disappointed if [Qatar] did more.

JI: There’s also President Trump’s plan to to turn Gaza into a ‘riviera.’ There has not been a lot of progress. Where do things stand? Is the U.S. asking any countries to accept Gazan refugees?

MH: I think it’s more of an Israeli mission to make that decision. What the president has said is U.S. policy is that people who are there who want to leave should be free to leave. They shouldn’t be forced to leave and face expulsion, but neither should people be forced to stay. It ought to be an individual, personal decision on the part of the people who are right now living in what is anything less than an ideal circumstance. 

JI: So you’re saying the U.S. is not involved in trying to find countries that will accept them?

MH: It’s not something that has been shared with me as to being an immediate issue. I know that there is definitely talk that this would be a great opportunity for people to have a fresh start that has been discussed at both the U.S. and Israeli levels. And I think everybody thinks that would be a wonderful thing if people had that option, and if countries were willing to say, “Hey, we’d love to have people come and be part of our labor force and immigrate to our country.” But I don’t know that there’s any specific plans that the U.S. has made on that…

The U.S. took a position several months ago when the president said … ’We’ll just take [Gaza] over. Immediately, within 24 hours, you had four or five Gulf countries saying, “Oh no, no, we want a piece of it. We’ll help govern.” People who don’t understand the president and how he works probably didn’t get it that the whole point was to force people to pony up and get in the game, and that’s exactly what happened…

What he does want to do is to see that these people have a chance for a better life, economically, and just from a security standpoint, they’re never going to have it under Hamas … Who runs [Gaza in the future]? Good question. Maybe it comes to the place where there’s a number of Middle Eastern countries that come and really make a partnership and a coalition and invest the money to rebuild it and give people an opportunity to have a decent and deserved life.

JI: There have been terrible clashes and massacres of the Druze minority in Syria in recent weeks. It seems from U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack, who’s also envoy to Syria, that the Trump administration still wants to give new Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa a chance. Is that causing friction with Israel, which tried to stop the violence against the Druze with airstrikes?

MH: Right now, the ceasefire has held for two days, which doesn’t seem like a lot of time, but in Syrian time, that’s a lot of time. There were some horrific things that have happened, especially to the Druze. The Israelis were very bold in standing up for the Druze and showing their support … literally going in and trying to help them with supplies and standing up assistance in every way they could. I thought it was an admirable thing, because the Druze have stood with Israel.

The head sheikh of the Druze community [Muwaffaq Tarif] was sitting right where you are on Tuesday afternoon. We had a very candid meeting about the situation they faced. They’re deeply grateful for Israel’s support. It did mean a lot to them that they weren’t just left hanging…

I’ve had several conversations with Ambassador Barrack over the course of the last week and before. It’s a fragile situation. Nobody’s going to deny that al-Sharaa is not exactly the person the U.S. would have picked … but he’s who we got.

What the president [Trump] did was, I think, bold, but also brilliant, at a time when al-Sharaa realized he doesn’t have the military or economic capacity to make Syria viable. He’s got to find a partner. He’s like the kid that goes to the prom and doesn’t have a date. Somebody’s going to go over there and say, “Would you dance with me?” Do we want it to be Iran, Russia, China? Absolutely not. President Trump comes in and says, “You can dance with me, but if you do, terrorism has to go away.” We can’t have these relationships with bad guys and remilitarize Syria and turn it into another nightmare like Assad. [Al-Sharaa] wisely decided that that was a better partnership than any offer he had. That’s where we are now. 

Everybody has anxieties about where this could go, but we also are in a place where it could turn the corner, go very well, and we could see normalization between Syria and Israel, and that would have looked really unthinkable two years ago.

JI: You don’t think that the last couple weeks have taken a Syria-Israel agreement off the table?

MH: No, I don’t at all. I think it showed some of the challenges that we face. A lot of things happened because of misunderstanding and lack of communication. When [the Syrian military] went south of Damascus with artillery and tanks, it looked like they were getting ready for a military operation. They should have better communicated to the Israelis [and said,] “This is not a threat to you. We’re not moving this equipment in there because we’re going to come across the border.” You know, everybody should have talked to each other better.

JI: But Israel wants that part of Syria, the south, entirely demilitarized. Do you think that’s something that Syria would agree to?

MH: Yes, I do. You want Syria to have some security forces, you’ve got to have that, but they don’t need a full-scale military with an air force and all the others. I think there are regional interests that would help provide a level of security for them that does not require the standing up of a navy and army … The ideal is to help them to become stable economically.

JI: There was reporting after the Israeli strikes in Syria that some people in the Trump administration called Netanyahu a madman and asked, “What country are they going to bomb next?” Does that ring true to you?

MH: I think that people who know don’t talk, and people who talk don’t know … I hate this kind of stuff where a person pretends that he knows something and blabs it out. The president has been very clear, again, without equivocation, that he and [Netanyahu] are very close friends. I saw with my own eyes and was in the room when there was an extraordinary level of camaraderie and cooperation … For all this talk about how there’s this terrible clash and all I would say, look at what is on the record, what is sourced with firsthand source, and dismiss the nonsense that people say … I discount it as somebody who’s trying to be important when they’re not that important.

JI: Still, it seems like there’s a kernel of truth to there being some sort of push and pull within the Trump administration, and even more so within the broader Republican Party, about foreign policy and how to relate to Israel. Do you think this is going to be a problem for Israel? 

MH: I really don’t see that. I mean, are there moments where Israel and the U.S. will disagree? Of course, [it] happens in partnerships, whether you’re in business or in marriage. I’ve been married 51 years. I guarantee you, my wife and I have had disagreements, sometimes, some pretty strong ones. She would tell you that she’s right and I’m always wrong. That’s part of the way we’ve stayed together 51 years. But it doesn’t mean that you don’t love each other and that you don’t stay together. 

It’s part of the process of being adults that you hash out your differences. So I don’t have any doubts that there are times they may have a conversation that they’re not on the same page …  I haven’t been privy to those, but that would be normal. 

JI: We’re coming out of a complicated week for Israel and Christians. There was an issue with work visas for people working in Christian organizations. How is that going to work going forward?

MH: It really wasn’t a big issue, except within that one area. And fortunately, we have it all resolved, and everybody’s happy … Really the new arrangement is the old arrangement, and that was that the process through which people would be granted visas coming to teach or to be a part of a Christian organization. It’s been handled the same exact way for decades, and we were very clear. We didn’t want anything new … Just do what you’ve been doing. It’s been working very well. There have been no problems with it. And then all of a sudden, in January, before I came, apparently there was a change in the way it was processed, and it was creating an enormous level of bureaucratic problems for the organizations, and they were frustrated, and it involved deep investigations and a lot of paperwork and cost…

So we had a meeting with a minister. Thought it went well and thought everything was resolved. The problem continued to happen. So if we would call with one specific case, it would get resolved, but then another one would come up, and then another … So I sent a letter. It was terse, but I felt it was an honest assessment of, look, we thought this was fixed. It isn’t. Here’s the problems it’s causing. We did not leak the letter, but it got leaked. I don’t know who sent it out, but that’s beyond the point. It resulted in immediate attention…

The point that I was making was that at a time when Israel needs all the friends it can get, and some of the best friends you have, the evangelical Christians in America, you really don’t want to tell them they’re not welcome, and that’s the message that’s being sent … We have to get it fixed. So we did, so everybody’s happy.

JI: By unfortunate coincidence, this was the same week where an IDF shell hit the church in Gaza, and then there was a fire near a church in Taybeh that Palestinians blamed on Israel.

MH: I think that it was unfortunate they were all happening at the same time, but they’re totally separate and not tied together in any way. The State of Israel didn’t do anything in Taybeh. And you know, [the shelling of] the Church of the Holy Family was a horrible thing, but to their credit, [the IDF] admitted that it was a terrible mistake and they apologized for it. It’s not something you would ever want to see happen. But Israel doesn’t get enough credit for owning up to a mistake when they make one and trying to make it right, and I appreciate that about them.

JI: You hear these voices of people saying Israel is going to lose Christian support. And there are polls that show young evangelical support for Israel in decline. Do you think that Israel needs to be doing something differently or reaching out more?

MH: I think there is some lessening of the support … There are several things at play. One is the advent of a lot of Middle Eastern studies on college and university campuses, highly funded by Gulf states that are pouring billions of dollars into these programs, and they’re somewhat indoctrinating influences … That’s part of it, and a lot of it is that maybe there’s just not a good historical context for some of the younger people that they don’t know. 

I’m convinced that one of the most important things people can do is to come to Israel and see for themselves. Don’t even take my word for it. You just come. That’s what I’ve been doing for 52 years. When I tell people my views of Israel, I tell them, look, it’s not something I read in a book or watched on a documentary or listened to some people give lectures. I’ve been coming here for 52 consecutive years. I’ve watched this country develop and grow and change … which I think had more credibility than just “I was at a march somewhere in Palo Alto [Calif.] and carried a sign for a few blocks. That’s something I hope happens more and more. The Jewish community has Birthright that brings a lot of young Jewish people here. There’s now an organization called Passages, and it’s bringing a lot of Christian kids here. I think that’s the most wonderful thing that can happen.

JI: Is the Trump administration still trying to negotiate with Iran? The Europeans said they will snap back sanctions if there isn’t an agreement by the end of August, and an Israeli official recently said the U.S. was hoping they would do it sooner. Is that true?

MH: I don’t know whether there’s any U.S. policy on hoping it would come sooner. Frankly, I’m just glad to hear the Europeans stand up for something that is right for a change. You know, they’ve been beating up Israel instead of Hamas for a while, and it’s kind of refreshing for them to realize that Iran’s playing games, and they’re still beating their chest and making threats that make no sense in light of what they’ve just been through.

In “Monty Python and the Holy Grail,” King Arthur cuts off [the Black Knight’s] arm, then his other arm, and then his legs. And the guy says, “‘tis but a scratch.” I mean, that’s Iran. They got their arms and legs cut off, and they’re hollering, “Just a scratch, you didn’t get me’” … And you just want to say to them, “Did you not get the message? You just got your brains kicked out, and this would be a good time for you to experience a little humility and recognize you’re never going to have a nuclear weapon. Everybody’s telling you this, even Europe is telling you this. They’re about to put sanctions on you because of it, and this might be a good time to reassess your aspirations to be a nuclear-weapon country.” So I’m grateful that Europe is talking this way, and if they do it in August, wonderful. That’s better than not doing it at all. And maybe — probably not, but maybe — Iran comes to [its] senses.

JI: You recently made an appearance in the courtroom for [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s trial with a Bugs Bunny doll. Was that something that the president wanted you to do, or was that your idea? Some Israelis are concerned that the country or the judiciary could be penalized over Netanyahu’s trial the way President Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Brazil over the corruption trials against former President Jair Bolsonaro. Is that a possibility?

MH: I have not heard anything like that … [Trump] had two very significant, substantial statements about the trials here because he himself has been put through an extraordinary level of lawfare. It’s just been shocking as an American citizen, to watch this, where they try to file charges, both civil and criminal, anywhere they can find a court that’ll take him, New York, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Florida…

I think what he’s trying to say is that if you’re going to want to change the government, do it at the ballot box. You don’t do it in the courtroom. What he saw happening to the prime minister here, he saw as a mirror reflection of what was going on there [in the U.S.]. And it’s not so much that it’s an accusation about the courts or their integrity here, but the act of prosecuting and the tenacity of prosecution while a prime minister is going through the middle of two wars and trying to get hostages released. 

As far as my being there, I hadn’t seen a circus in a long time, so I decided to go.

After Israel waged war against an Iranian regime that has vowed to destroy the Jewish state and diaspora Jews face a heightened atmosphere of antisemitism stemming from the Israel-Gaza war, a new book aims to equip Israel supporters with “a foundation” to refute claims that Jews do not have ancient roots in the land of Israel. 

When the Stones Speak: The Remarkable Discovery of the City of David and What Israel’s Enemies Don’t Want You to Know, written by former IDF spokesperson Doron Spielman, does so by recounting discoveries made in Israel’s largest excavation site, the City of David, where Spielman has worked closely with archaeologists for two decades to uncover and promote the site’s historical significance.

The book, Spielman suggested in an interview with Jewish Insider, is aimed at what he calls “the middle group of people” — “logical, reasonable people” who don’t know whether they’re pro-Israel or anti-Israel. “When they understand that ‘when the stones speak,’ they tell the story of the truth of the Jewish people’s connection to the land,” that could help sway the conversation on college campuses. This middle group will come to understand, he said, that “at the very least [the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] is a fight between two people who think they’re indigenous, and at the very best they understand the Jews are people who have only one land, they’ve been there for 3,800 years and therefore they have a right to defend it.”

That understanding “will have not only a huge impact on [the rise of antisemitism on college] campuses,” Spielman said, it “will have a huge impact on the Jews on those campuses. Jews on campus need to be able to stand on a foundation of truth that Israel is in fact their land. Without this knowledge, they cannot make that statement.”​​

Spielman hopes the book’s impact will also reach supporters of New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, the presumptive winner of the city’s Democratic primary last week, amid his refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada” and denial that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. 

“He’s denying the Jewish people their right to live as a nation in the one place they ever called home,” Spielman told JI. “When the Stones Speak cuts through the lies with facts on the ground — literally.” 

Spielman, who lives in Jerusalem, wrote the book’s first draft before Hamas launched its Oct. 7, 2023, attacks in Israel. Before the massacre, he had planned to meet with his editor on Oct. 8, 2023. That was put on hold when he was drafted into the reserves for 100 days. “When I came back to the book, I understood how far Hamas was willing to go with its ideology,” Spielman said. “If they aimed to erase our history, then the next thing they were going to try to do was erase us as a people.” So in light of Oct. 7, he reedited the entire book — which made it to The New York Times bestseller list just weeks after its May 13 publication.

“This is not just an academic debate, this is a battlefront,” Spielman continued. “The Jewish people need to understand and own our identity. This is critical — literally life and death — for Jews and Israel supporters to understand this because this is exactly what our enemies are fighting against.”

Since Israel launched its preemptive military campaign against Iran — a move that Spielman said “will prevent a major [worldwide] escalation later on with China,” which backs Tehran — Spielman said that the message of his book has become even more critical. It comes as the Iranian regime has been at the forefront of the effort to deny Jewish connections to ancient Israel. 

“The Quds Force, which is the long arm of Iran and provides support for Hezbollah, Hamas, militias, is based on the very principle that the faith the ayatollahs want to establish reaches all the way to Jerusalem and replaces completely what they call the Zionist state,” Spielman said. “It’s not by chance that Hamas, which is a child of Iran, has taken this idea of denying Jewish history and translated it into absolutely the educational indoctrination of every Palestinian in Gaza and the West Bank, [who] are taught that Jews have no connection to their history in Jerusalem.”

Amid a rise of antisemitism in America, Spielman is hopeful that the book will help combat the movement by left-wing groups to equate the Zionist movement with “settler colonialism.”  

“If we’re looking to understand why Jews are being attacked on campuses, it’s the same ideology of denying the connection between Jews and Jerusalem — that is exactly what is erupting on campuses, the claim that we are settlers and colonialists,” he said. “I wrote this book before Oct. 7 in order to establish firmly that we have the archaeological proof that the Jewish people are more indigenous to Israel than any people are in any area of the world today. We have an unbroken chain.”

Spielman expressed hope that the discoveries and insights from the City of David eventually make their way into textbooks used in American middle and high schools. He also called on the U.S. Department of Education to work proactively to ensure that students are taught about the historic ties of the Jewish people to the land of Israel.

He pointed to one of his findings from several years ago at the entrance of the City of David: the seals of two ministers who in the Book of Jeremiah tried to kill the namesake prophet.

“A massive campaign erupted throughout the Muslim world denying the legitimacy of these findings,” Spielman said. “They also realized what a threat this was to the narrative of the Palestinians which was claiming that the Jews have no connection and therefore they began identifying the City of David as a massive settlement effort, never mentioning the name of the City of David. It’s amazing that they did this because they realized that they can’t stop the archaeology so they tried to stop the entire site … [The] bottom line is that all of the claims that Jews are settlers shatter when they are held up over the bedrock of the City of David and the discoveries we’ve made.” 

Spielman noted that City of David excavations have “widespread acceptance” across the political spectrum in Israel, with politicians from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Yair Lapid, the opposition leader, having visited the site.  

“Within the standard Israeli electorate, the City of David is really a central place of Israeli identity today and therefore the budget is funded by private individuals around the world as well as Israeli tax dollars,” Spielman told JI. 

He urged world leaders to visit as well. “For the same reason that Washington, D.C., is the historical site that you want every diplomat from around the world to see, a diplomat that comes to Israel that only goes to Yad Vashem [Israel’s Holocaust museum] is only getting five years of the Jewish story of exile. When you go to the City of David, you’re getting 2,000 years.”  

At the City of David, there is “something deeper than modern-day geopolitics,” Spielman said. “There is a claim here that goes to the heart. It’s something Israelis have ignored for a long time. We cannot stand strong about our rights to the land of Israel unless we understand the very foundations of our connections to the land. Archaeology, DNA, ancient texts and the stones of Jerusalem prove what history already knows— the Jewish people are not colonizers in their homeland.” 

“It’s not enough to talk about how we carry out our military and that we’re a moral army. We have got to go back to the reason we’re here.”

A new Quinnipiac poll released on Wednesday underscores the growing partisanship over Israel, and the declining sympathies among Democratic voters towards the Jewish state.

The survey asked respondents whether their sympathies were more with Israelis or Palestinians. A 37% plurality said Israelis, 32% said Palestinians and 31% said they don’t know — the narrowest advantage Israel has had since Quinnipiac began asking the question in 2001. 

The slippage was driven mainly by Democrats, who now are overwhelmingly more sympathetic towards Palestinians. Among Democrats, just 12% said their sympathies were more with Israelis while a record 60% said they were with Palestinians. 

By comparison, in November 2023, shortly after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, the Quinnipiac survey found 41% of Democrats saying they were more sympathetic to Palestinians, while 34% said they were more sympathetic to Israelis. 

By contrast, Republicans remain overwhelmingly supportive of Israel and independents are still more supportive of Israelis than Palestinians. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Republicans are more sympathetic to Israelis, while 7% are more sympathetic to Palestinians. The small share of Republicans more sympathetic to the Palestinians is unchanged since 2023.

Among independents, 38% express more sympathy towards Israelis, 30% side with Palestinians and 31% don’t have an opinion.

The poll also asked respondents about the significance of antisemitism, which voters from both parties agreed was a worsening problem. Nearly three-fourths of voters (73%) said anti-Jewish prejudice was either a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem. Nearly half of Republicans (47%) considered antisemitism a very serious problem, compared to 36% of Democrats, and 35% of independents.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) will travel to Israel on Sunday for his second visit to the Jewish state, the Pennsylvania Democrat told Jewish Insider on Friday.

Fetterman told JI of his plans in the Capitol early Friday evening while waiting to finish votes on funding legislation to prevent a government shutdown. The trip will mark Fetterman’s third international trip since being elected to the Senate in 2022. He did not elaborate on his schedule while in Israel. 

The Senate will be out of session all of next week.

Fetterman visited the Jewish state for the first time last June, during which he had meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Isaac Herzog, Opposition Leader Yair Lapid, former Defense Minister Benny Gantz, Labor Party leader Yair Golan and Defense Minister Israel Katz, who was then serving as the country’s foreign minister. He also met with then-U.S. Ambassador to Israel Jack Lew and families of hostages.

Fetterman opted against visiting the sites of Hamas’ on Oct. 7, 2023, massacres during his first trip, saying at the time that he did not want to make anyone relive their trauma. He instead visited with students and faculty at Hebrew University and took a tour of Yad Vashem, the nation’s Holocaust memorial and museum.

Fetterman has also only been on one other congressional delegation out of the United States. His first trip after being elected was a brief visit to Turks and Caicos last May as part of a bipartisan delegation that facilitated the release of five detained Americans.

Fetterman, who suffered a stroke during his Senate campaign, has spent most of his first term thus far between Washington and Pennsylvania. 

Pro-Israel Democrats are grappling with how to reconcile widespread support for the Jewish state with vocal and occasionally misleading attacks from an outspoken faction of the party amid escalating violence between Israel and Hamas. In recent weeks, a group of House members critical of Israel have amped up their rhetoric, accusing Israel of “apartheid” in sharply worded social media statements while renewing calls for conditioned U.S. military assistance and seemingly downplaying threats from Hamas.

Even a pair of well-established Israel supporters in the Senate have veered from their usual pronouncements. On Saturday, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said he was “deeply troubled” by Israel’s recent military actions, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has been conspicuously reticent on the issue. 

Still, longtime pro-Israel advocates in the party argue that support for the Jewish state remains strong even as social media platforms like Twitter appear to have empowered the Democratic Party’s more extreme Israel critics. “I’m not overly concerned about where the House Democratic Caucus is on Israel,” former Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY), who chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee from 2011 to 2015, said in an interview with Jewish Insider on Wednesday. “They support U.S.-Israeli relations.”

“I do get concerned with imbalanced news coverage and social media,” Israel added, “because neither of those platforms are providing the context that’s necessary to truly understand the conflict, and how to resolve it.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), a long-standing pro-Israel stalwart, echoed that view. “We have a small group of loud voices,” she said. “The overwhelming majority of Democrats in the nation, and Democrats in Congress, are strongly supportive of Israel, of the U.S.-Israel relationship, of Israel remaining a Jewish and Democratic state.”

“From the president on down, there are still many, many, many Democrats who will always have strong support for Israel,” said Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC), the former chairwoman of the Jewish Federations of North America. “I think we’re seeing some weariness by some Democrats because if all you do is watch the news, what you see is heartbreaking,” she added. “But people need to understand that Hamas brought this up.”

Rep. Kathy Manning (D-NC) speaks in support of Israel on the House floor on May 13, 2021.

According to AIPAC spokesman Marshall Wittmann, “bipartisan congressional solidarity with Israel has been expressed in nearly 400 statements of support during the current conflict.”

Recent polling, however, has also contributed to the impression that Democratic support for Israel may be diminishing, as two separate surveys released on Wednesday appeared to suggest. While a plurality of registered Democratic voters — 36% — said they sympathized with both Israelis and Palestinians, 34% of respondents were either unfamiliar with or didn’t have an opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to a Morning Consult/Politico survey of 1,992 voters. Moreover, the poll revealed that 18% of Democratic respondents sympathize with Palestinians and 12% with Israelis.

Those numbers were further underscored in an Economist/YouGov poll published yesterday, indicating that 35% of Democratic voters were equally sympathetic to Israelis and Palestinians while another 23% of Democrats sympathize with Palestinians and 16% with Israelis.

Despite the variety of opinion, the new polls simply demonstrate that more Democrats now harbor positive attitudes toward both the Israeli and Palestinian causes, views that dovetail with Democratic support for a two-state solution, according to Tamara Cofman Wittes, a senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. 

“Being an ally of Israel,” Wittes told JI, “doesn’t mean, based on the polling data we have, that Americans don’t care about Palestinians or their aspirations or their rights.”

A recent Gallup poll indicated that three-quarters of Americans hold a favorable view of Israel — a number that has held steady since at least 2018. 

“Pro-Israel Democrats, who represent the overwhelming majority of the party, are making it clear that support of Israel’s right of self defense and support of Palestinian rights are not mutually exclusive,” said Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. 

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has not been the subject of such heated debate since the 2014 war between Israel and Gaza, according to Soifer, and recent tensions in the region have cast light on what she describes as a “new pro-Israel paradigm” within the Democratic Party that may have gone undetected until now. “People no longer view being pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian as a binary choice,” she said. 

In this July 15, 2019, file photo, U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn, right, speaks, as U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. listens, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

In that time, however, digitally savvy Israel critics such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) — all of whom were elected in the last few years — have also become adept at using social media to disseminate their views. 

“I think the anti-Israel forces were more determined, more creative, and worked harder in getting their message out,” Ann Lewis, co-chair of Democratic Majority for Israel, told JI. “They felt they were the underdogs, and therefore, they were more committed to telling this story and telling it in some pretty loud way.” 

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), a leader among Democrats skeptical of Israel who organized an hour of House floor speeches criticizing Israel’s policies and behavior toward Palestinians last week, claimed that an increasing number of Democrats in Congress are siding with him on this issue. 

“You’re seeing more members who are raising questions,” Pocan told reporters on Wednesday. “Last week was the first time we filled an entire hour — we had more people that wanted to speak than even could.”

But Pocan also acknowledged that left-wing Israel critics are at odds with Democratic Party leaders, telling reporters that he is unsure if House Democratic leadership will allow a vote on a resolution introduced by Ocasio-Cortez seeking to block a $735 million arms sale to Israel. 

Pocan said the Israeli-Palestinian conflict represents one of the progressive caucus’s biggest areas of disagreement with President Joe Biden, who has reiterated his belief that Israel has the right to defend itself while expressing support for a cease-fire between Israel and Gaza.

“I don’t feel like Israel’s position, its security, its American diplomatic support globally, is imperiled,” said Scott Lasensky, who served as a senior policy adviser on the Middle East and Israel in the Obama administration. “But it will make some uncomfortable. If some want Americans’ support and congressional support to be zero sum and to be uncomplicated, that’s not the reality that we’re in right now.”

Joel Rubin, executive director of the American Jewish Congress who served as director of Jewish outreach for Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-VT) 2020 presidential campaign, said he has been concerned by some of the charged rhetoric used by progressive Democrats on social media, particularly amid rising incidents of antisemitism.

“I think we’ve kind of lost our way a little bit in the language on this,” Rubin said in an interview with JI, noting that some progressive Israel critics are “pushing away” potential allies as they rush to denounce the Jewish state. “That’s distressing.”

But while the conversation may be somewhat raw at the moment, Rubin is optimistic that Democrats can ultimately find room for productive debate as intraparty disagreement over Israel comes to a climax. “It’s always been a fascinating and intriguing tension point,” he said. “But it’s healthy in a lot of ways.”