Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) on Sunday called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch an investigation after the lawmaker said he was harassed by Israeli settlers in the West Bank last week, an incident Netanyahu attributed to a small group of “vigilantes.”

During his first known trip to Israel and the West Bank since October 2024, Khanna said that his delegation’s van had been surrounded, stopped and taunted last Wednesday by Israeli settlers armed with U.S.-made M4 rifles during a tour of the southern West Bank, an incident that a New York Times photographer traveling in a different vehicle said he witnessed. 

Khanna claimed IDF vehicles then appeared, and the soldiers spoke amiably with the settlers and continued to block the road themselves after the settlers departed. The IDF denied that the visitors were detained by military personnel.

Cameron Kasky, an aide to Khanna, said the group was held for over an hour and appealed to the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem for assistance. Kasky previously ran in the Democratic primary in New York’s 12th Congressional District on an explicitly anti-Israel platform.

Khanna told NBC News the incident had made him “more resolved” to consider a presidential run in 2028. 

“I have something unique to offer about the injustices of Palestinians,” he told the Times. “I’m going to go to every corner of America, regardless of whether I run or not, and tell their stories and tell the story of what is happening in the West Bank.”

An IDF spokesperson told NBC that troops and police officers were dispatched to the scene in a “closed military zone” after a “report was received regarding Israeli civilians who were unlawfully blocking the vehicle of foreign nationals.” The military said the soldiers reopened the road and let the delegation through.

Israel Police said that officers on the scene did not witness any violence and that the group was stopped in a restricted zone. Israel prohibits its citizens from entering certain areas of the West Bank without an IDF permit, particularly Palestinian Authority-controlled Area A, which are typically marked with warning signs. Foreign civilians are generally not legally barred from these areas, though they may be subject to security advisories or temporary restrictions.

Police added that Khanna’s tour group leader was warned of a possible arrest and that the group was told that civilians were not permitted in the area, before being released. Khanna said that his office had alerted the Israeli Embassy in Washington of his visit — a claim that was denied by the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter.

Speaking on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Leiter said that Khanna’s team did not alert Israeli authorities, saying instead that the California lawmaker had ignored a request from officials to allow them to assist in coordinating the trip. 

“We reached out to him [Khanna] when we heard he was going to Israel … We suggested he visit with survivors of the Oct. 7 [2023] massacre, that he visit the borders so he understands the issues that we have on our borders and so on,” Leiter said. “He [Khanna] ignored that and he decided to coordinate his trip not with Israel, but with Palestinian activists and with J Street.”

“There was a question about visas, that’s all,” Leiter added of Khanna’s outreach to the embassy. “But when we requested that he coordinate the trip with us, he rejected that by basically staying silent.”

J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami on Sunday denied that J Street had any involvement in organizing Khanna’s visit.

Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Khanna called the encounter “unprecedented” and accused the IDF of “lying.”

“They had violent settlers detain American citizens, including an American government official,” Khanna said. “You had these settlers brandishing M4s, kicking the tires of our van, laughing at us, mocking us, videotaping us. We were detained for about 20 minutes, fearful for our lives. Then the IDF comes, four soldiers, they tell our translator that they’re on the side of the settlers.”

Also appearing on NBC on Sunday, Netanyahu insisted that Israel is “a country of laws” and blamed the confrontation on a fringe group of  “vigilantes.”

“We’re a country of laws, and people who break the law, we take them to court,” Netanyahu said. “There is a vigilante effort, not by the settler community … There are 150 juvenile delinquents that are not part of that community. They come from other parts of Israel. I don’t want vigilantes of any kind, and we are working to put them under the law.”

Responding to Netanyahu’s remarks, Khanna pushed the Israeli leader to further investigate the matter.

“The prime minister needs to open an investigation on these violent settlers,” Khanna said. “They need to be prosecuted … their outpost needs to be investigated, and he [Netanyahu] needs to have an investigation on these four IDF officers.”

“Security cameras can see that they were involved in the detention of American citizens,” he added. “How dare they mistreat people with an American passport that way?”

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) continued a war of words with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as she faced a barrage of attacks from her primary opponent, former public health official Abdul El-Sayed, at a debate on Tuesday in Michigan.

Netanyahu, in a CNN interview earlier on Tuesday, criticized Stevens for saying that his actions and government had made the Jewish community less safe and placed Jews in an “uncomfortable position.”

“It’s made her uncomfortable because she can’t stand up for the truth. She’s trying to, probably, excuse antisemitism,” Netanyahu said in response to a question from CNN host Dana Bash. 

Asked about the war in Iran, Stevens criticized both President Donald Trump and Netanyahu.

“We need long-term peace. Donald Trump has failed us. The prime minister of Israel has failed in that regard, and he was just coming after me on this today,” Stevens said. “Look, I am unafraid. Michigan, you are my North Star, and no illegal wars, no unilateral wars at our expense.”

She doubled down on those criticisms later in the debate.

“It is very clear that Mr. Netanyahu has not made us safer, has not brought us closer to peace, and he’s endangered Jews here in America and around the world,” Stevens said. “This is why he was just trashing me today on CNN. I am not afraid of bullies. I am not afraid to stand up, and I continue to stand up for humanitarian aid, for the U.S. to work with the countries in the region and get aid into Gaza.”

She also highlighted her work with the families of Israeli hostages formerly held in Gaza.

Stevens accused El-Sayed of opposing a two-state solution, alluding to his repeated refusal to say directly whether he believes Israel has a right to exist.

“The difference between my opponent and myself on this issue is that I believe in a two-state solution,” Stevens said. “I can say that Israel has a right to peacefully exist alongside the people of Palestine and in Gaza.”

El-Sayed argued that Netanyahu and AIPAC’s support for U.S. politicians are the primary reasons the U.S. entered the war, and emphasized that an AIPAC-linked super PAC has been attacking him and supporting Stevens.

“So long as our politicians continue to be bought off by AIPAC, do not be surprised when we fight wars that are in their best interest to … annex Lebanon or to do genocide in Gaza,” he continued.

He also argued that U.S. support for Israel, which he described as a “rogue state,” has foreclosed the possibility of a two-state solution, calling for an end to U.S. aid to Israel and “blank checks” to other Middle Eastern countries including Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

In response to repeated attacks over her support from AIPAC, Stevens pivoted to discussing other issues including her record in Michigan, GOP support for El-Sayed’s campaign and El-Sayed’s failure to release his tax returns, among other issues.

Responding to multiple questions from viewers and the debate moderator about the leftward shift of the Democratic Party, both candidates largely sidestepped the issue, though El-Sayed suggested he’s supportive of a shift in the party.

“I’ll tell you this: it won’t shift if we continue to elect leaders who take money from the same corporations who have broken with the interests of the American public,” El-Sayed said. “[Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer (D-NY) desperately wants one of us to be the next senator, and it’s not me. So, if you want your politics dictated by AIPAC or Chuck Schumer, then I’m not your guy.”

Stevens, meanwhile, emphasized her record in office as a “workhorse” for the state. “This has always been about Michigan,” she said, when asked whether the race was a battle over the future direction of the Democratic Party.

El-Sayed ultimately offered a similar answer, saying, “I’m not doing this because of some direction of a party. I’m doing this because of the Michiganders that I’ve gotten to see.”

The Likud party’s statement on Wednesday confirming that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would stand on the ballot this fall put to bed long-swirling rumors that the prime minister was considering forgoing another run — potentially in exchange for the government dropping its legal case against him.

That speculation had deepened earlier in the week, when President Donald Trump publicly mused whether Netanyahu, whom Trump referred to as “a wartime prime minister,” might decide to exit politics. A survey released this week by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 61% of Israelis — including 57% of Jewish Israelis and 87% of Arab Israelis — think Netanyahu should refrain from seeking another term.

With Netanyahu ending speculation about his political future, the focus now turns to the candidates seeking to unseat him.

Gadi Eisenkot’s ascent — earlier this week, a Channel 12 poll found for the first time that more Israelis favored him over Netanyahu as prime minister — comes as the former IDF chief of staff, who lost a son and two nephews in the Hamas war, becomes increasingly critical of Netanyahu, in whose war cabinet Eisenkot sat. As Israeli journalist Nadav Eyal points out, Eisenkot “isn’t seen as aggressive toward anyone but Netanyahu.”

Meanwhile, former Prime Ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid have experienced little momentum after they announced their merger into the “Together” slate in April. 

The two made a risky bet in joining forces with many months to go before the election — one that can’t easily be undone. And while their broad coalition was successful in 2021, it’s unclear if Together’s tent is big enough for all the anti-Netanyahu voters — in a changed electorate post-Oct. 7 — whom Bennett and Lapid would need to pick up. 

Bennett — whose previous party was called Yamina, the Hebrew word for “right,” and who has described himself as more right-wing than Netanyahu — will have the additional challenge of convincing his potential supporters that he will not be too accommodating to the left. It’s worth recalling that their previous “Change” government was felled by breakaway members who were angry over Bennett’s concessions to his more-liberal coalition partners.  

Part of the Change coalition’s success in 2021 — and also its downfall the following year — was its recruitment of Mansour Abbas’ Ra’am party. Now, Ra’am remains the one Arab party not joining forces with the three others, as efforts to form an alliance falter. And Abbas said as recently as a month ago that Eisenkot, Bennett and former Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman “are all worthy and have the experience to lead the next government” — even as all three have distanced themselves from Abbas. 

But depending on how the seats are apportioned after votes are counted, the anti-Netanyahu opposition could potentially need Ra’am’s support to get to 61 seats. That possibility — though Bennett has said he will only sit with Zionist parties — could prove to be a poison pill for some right-wing voters disenchanted by Netanyahu who could otherwise be swayed to vote for Bennett in the election.

Though no election date has been set, it is increasingly likely that Israelis will cast their ballots in late October, close to the deadline mandated by Israeli law, and weeks after the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attacks, which occurred on Netanyahu’s watch. 

Even in spite of the Oct. 7 attacks, Netanyahu has sought to portray himself as a strongman protecting his country. But he is increasingly seen by Israelis — and even his own supporters — as deferential to Trump (who recently proclaimed, “I call the shots” regarding Iran moves). Netanyahu’s own envoy to Washington, Yechiel Leiter, told CNN last month that Israel was a “junior partner” to the U.S vis-à-vis Iran.

Without a resolution to the ongoing tensions with Tehran — to say nothing of the recent waves of ballistic missile attacks from Iran and Yemen, and Hezbollah’s ongoing fire targeting northern Israel — Netanyahu could find himself fighting his toughest battle yet.

It’s a strange moment when the leader of the free world explains to a reporter why he cursed out the prime minister of a major ally.

But we live in an increasingly strange moment, one in which President Donald Trump confirmed to the New York Post this week that he had indeed called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “f***ing crazy” during a discussion about Israel’s plans to expand operations in Lebanon, even as he stressed that he and the Israeli leader have “worked very well together.” (Trump’s confirmation came after Netanyahu’s office denied the remarks.)

The tense nature of the Trump-Netanyahu call this week underscores the increasingly divergent tactics the two are taking to ongoing conflicts in the Middle East as Trump leans into diplomacy while Netanyahu pushes for intensified military action — and as questions loom over the future of U.S. aid to Israel.

With the House’s passage of a war powers resolution yesterday (with four Republicans breaking with House GOP leadership), and a Senate vote on the issue still pending, the Trump administration’s appetite for a resumption of hostilities is even smaller than it was last month (when, as we reported, it was already quite low, owing to rising gas prices and the approaching midterms). 

And it’s not just Trump distancing the U.S. from renewed all-out conflict. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers that the Iran war was “over.”

The comments come even as Iran continues to scale up its attacks in the region, in some cases prompting a U.S. response. Early Wednesday morning, the Islamic Republic launched a drone attack targeting Kuwait’s main airport, killing one person and injuring at least 60.

Trump has reportedly set a red line on Iran, telling aides that he could end the ceasefire — which, while not a technical halting of all fire, has resulted in far fewer exchanges of fire and destruction than at the height of the war in March and early April — if U.S. troops are killed.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu told CNBC on Wednesday that he wants to start the process of winding down U.S. military aid to Israel over the next two years — the final years of Trump’s term — in a way that would shift the relationship, according to the prime minister, “from aid to a partnership where we both invest equal amounts and both share equally in the fruits of our innovators and technologies.” Such a move, Netanyahu added, “will also take away the myth that Israel is depleting America’s coffers” — a popular talking point among opponents of U.S. aid to Israel on Capitol Hill and beyond.

On paper, Washington and Jerusalem do appear in lockstep — alongside Beirut — on deepening relations between Israel and Lebanon and rooting out Hezbollah. To that effect, the White House announced in a joint statement with Lebanese and Israeli officials on Wednesday that the parties had agreed to a renewed ceasefire — though it is contingent on the cooperation of Hezbollah, which did not take part in the talks and continues to launch drones and missiles at northern Israel.

But even as officials in Washington reach an accord on Lebanon, the challenges on the ground remain much the same. It was, after all, the issue of Lebanon — and Netanyahu’s announcement that the IDF would attack Hezbollah strongholds in Beirut — that triggered Trump’s expletive-laden outburst on Monday, causing Netanyahu to walk back Israel’s military plans in Lebanon.

And while Netanyahu needs to stay in Trump’s good graces, it is voters in Israel — including those in the country’s north who are living under daily Hezbollah fire — whom Netanyahu will need to sway ahead of the fall elections. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that he wants to start the process of winding down U.S. aid to Israel in the final two years of the Trump administration, as both countries work on a new memorandum of understanding.

Netanyahu made the comments in an interview with CNBC’s Sara Eisen after being asked about his political future and when Israel would be ready for new leadership. The prime minister responded by noting that while the Israeli people could decide at “any time” to remove him from power, he is currently focused on achieving four objectives: “finish[ing] the security envelope that we have to make vis-à-vis Iran and its proxies”; securing more investments globally to expand Israel’s AI and tech sectors; normalizing relations with several countries in the Middle East; and ending Israel’s reliance on U.S. aid. 

“The other thing I want to do is move away, in America, from aid to partnership. We’re now working on a memorandum of understanding, which will bring down the aid,” Netanyahu said. “I want it to start now, I want it to start in the last two years of the Trump administration and I want it to keep going down, coming to zero, because I think we’ve come of age.” 

The current MOU, which provides Israel with $3.8 billion in U.S. military aid annually, runs through FY 2028. Netanyahu did not clarify whether he would like to see aid begin to wind down through changes to the current agreement, or whether he is focused on ongoing negotiations for the next one.

“Israel has a robust economy, and I want us to go from aid to a partnership where we both invest equal amounts and both share equally in the fruits of our innovators and technologies,” he continued. “I think that’s very, very important. It will also take away the myth that Israel is depleting America’s coffers.”

Netanyahu has said on multiple occasions since January that he hopes to wean Israel off of U.S. aid, initially suggesting in January that Israel would work to end U.S. aid within the next ten years. He pitched the aid drawdown to President Donald Trump in late December, an idea the president was initially bewildered by and not supportive of. 

Netanyahu also downplayed reports that Trump told him he is “f***ing crazy” in a phone call on Monday about Israel’s military escalation in Lebanon and rejected the notion that his relationship with the president had shifted, noting that the two speak as frequently as “every two days.” 

Still, he did not deny that the conversation occurred as reported.

“Sometimes we have, as in the best of families, you have these tactical disagreements. We always find a way to work them out and we do so as great friends,” Netanyahu said. “We can disagree in the morning, and by the afternoon we have common action.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, along with other Israeli officials, issued a sharp condemnation of far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir after he released a video showing himself taunting detained flotilla activists. 

Ben-Gvir posted the video, filmed at Ashdod Port, to social media on Wednesday, where he can be seen mocking dozens of international activists captured from a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. In the footage, the blindfolded activists are shown kneeling on the ground with their hands cuffed behind their backs. Waving a large Israeli flag over the handcuffed activists, Ben-Gvir shouts in Hebrew, “Welcome to Israel, we are the masters.”

International activists have launched several flotillas since the start of Israel’s war with Hamas, attempting to break the blockade and deliver aid to Gaza. The IDF has repeatedly intercepted these convoys, many of which have been found not to have aid on board, and deported the participants. On Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned four individuals “associated with the pro-Hamas flotilla,” which it said was organized by the U.S.-designated Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad. 

The political fallout from the video came quickly from Ben-Gvir’s own governing coalition, including public condemnation from Netanyahu, who sought to separate Israel’s defense policies from Ben-Gvir’s personal optics.

“Israel has every right to prevent provocative flotillas of Hamas terrorist supporters from entering our territorial waters and reaching Gaza,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “However, the way that Minister Ben-Gvir dealt with the flotilla activists is not in line with Israel’s values and norms.”

Netanyahu added that he had already instructed authorities to expedite the deportation of the foreign activists. Netanyahu has repeatedly resisted pressure to oust Ben-Gvir from his Cabinet, calculating that he was essential to the survival of his coalition.

Foreign Affairs Minister Gideon Sa’ar also fiercely rebuked the performance, sparking an online feud between the two Cabinet ministers. In a post on X, Sa’ar told Ben-Gvir that he is “not the face of Israel.”

“You deliberately caused damage to the state in this disgraceful performance, and not for the first time,” Sa’ar wrote. “You squandered enormous, professional, and successful efforts made by many, many people — from IDF soldiers to Ministry of Foreign Affairs employees and many other fine individuals.”

Ben-Gvir pushed back against Sa’ar, doubling down on his actions.

“Israel’s Foreign Minister is expected to understand that Israel has stopped being a pushover,” Ben-Gvir retorted. “Anyone who comes to our territory to support terrorism and identify with Hamas will get slapped, and we won’t turn the other cheek.”

The video also garnered outcry from the Italian government, which has since summoned Israel’s ambassador in Rome, Jonathan Peled.

“The images of the Israeli minister Ben-Gvir are unacceptable. It is inadmissible that these demonstrators, including many Italian citizens, are subjected to this treatment that violates human dignity,” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said in an official statement. 

Meloni noted that Italy is demanding “an apology for the treatment reserved to these demonstrators and for the total contempt shown toward the explicit requests of the Italian Government,” and said she plans to take immediate steps to secure the release of the detained Italians.

Antonio Tajani, Italy’s deputy prime minister and foreign minister, echoed Meloni’s sharp rebuke. “What emerges from Minister Ben-Gvir’s video is absolutely unacceptable and contrary to every basic safeguard of human dignity,” Tajani stated.

Former Secretary of State Tony Blinken said at a Harvard Kennedy School event this week that he warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a few months into the war in Gaza that Israel was going to lose support among not just Democrats, but also Republicans and evangelical Christians.

“Israel was mostly seen as the David and other forces were seen as the Goliath. That is now flipped,” Blinken said. “One of the things that I told Netanyahu was, ‘You may not care that you’re losing the Democratic Party, but trust me, you are going to lose young Republicans. You’re going to lose young evangelicals. This is generational.’ And he moved on to something else.”

The conversation took place early in 2024, a few months after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks that killed 1,200 people in Israel. During his remarks at Harvard, Blinken said he wonders if there is more the U.S. could have done to protect Palestinians in Gaza. But he also called on people not to be “binary” in their thinking about the Middle East.

“Of course, for me, coulda-woulda-shoulda is something that will always be there when it comes to Gaza. It could not help but be given the level of human suffering,” said Blinken. 

“But where did we start? We started with Oct. 7. We started with the most horrific massacre of Jews since the Holocaust,” Blinken added. “It’s very easy to say, ‘Oh, yeah, that’s a given.’ Except it wasn’t a given for Israelis and Israeli society. It became one for the rest of the world, but not for Israelis.”

Blinken was being interviewed by New York Times reporter David Sanger, who said that history books written about President Joe Biden will show his administration as “strongest on Ukraine and weakest on Gaza.” 

Asked whether the Biden administration could have done things differently in Gaza to save lives, Blinken said, “Could we, should we have done things differently such that the suffering that people endured, the loss of the children you just listed and so many others could have been averted? The short answer is: Maybe yes.”

“We had to make judgments in real time about how to try to get to a better place. We made those judgments. People will make their own judgments about what we did and what we didn’t do,” said Blinken.

Despite the humanitarian crisis that emerged in Gaza, the U.S. pushed Israel to do more for Palestinians and to allow more aid into Gaza, Blinken said.

“That didn’t just happen. It happened because every single day we were on the Israelis to try to get assistance in, to open more crossing points, to flood the zone. They did that profoundly inadequately. They did that in ways that were not the way I would like to have seen it done, but we got some of that done,” said Blinken. “But yes, of course, you couldn’t be and I wouldn’t be human if I didn’t ask myself every day, could we have done things differently.”

Blinken said that the trauma Israelis experienced after Oct. 7 was so severe that Israel’s war in Gaza would have continued, even without American support — and that cutting off American weapons sales to Israel may have actually lengthened the war.

“Cutting off arms, sure, that was an option. But I don’t actually believe that at least in the near term, it would have changed things,” said Blinken. “I also believe it would have led to an even wider war as Israel’s enemies, and they were multiple, jumped in, and that only would have extended the war in Gaza, not ended the war in Gaza.”

The main focus of the Biden administration, according to Blinken, was to reach a ceasefire, “with hostages coming out and with aid going in.” He acknowledged the pain of people who were angry about the situation in Gaza, but questioned why so little anger was directed at Hamas.

“I empathize with people who felt this so deeply,” said Blinken. “I do remain with a question in my mind about why barely a word was spoken in all those months about Hamas, which was an actor too, and is responsible for so much of what happened.”

At first glance, President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nearly three-hour meeting at the White House on Wednesday appeared to end without any clear accomplishments.

Instead of the freewheeling question-and-answer sessions with media in the Oval Office and formal press conferences that followed most of Trump and Netanyahu’s previous six meetings since Trump returned to the White House, came a laconic statement from Netanyahu’s office about Israel’s security needs and a Truth Social post from Trump that was staid by the president’s standards. 

Trump wrote that he “insisted that negotiations with Iran continue to see whether or not a deal can be consummated. If I can, I let the Prime Minister know that will be a preference.” However, the president warned that last time Iran decided against making a deal, “that did not work out well for them,” and the U.S. struck the country’s nuclear sites.

However, Trump and Netanyahu were similarly silent about their meeting in April 2025 — their last in-person meeting before the joint strike in Iran two months later.

Behind the scenes, the main topic of conversation between the two leaders yesterday appeared to focus on options for action if Iran does not agree to a deal. 

The lack of press around the meeting was because Netanyahu wanted to keep a relatively low profile and show deference to Trump, since a strike on Iran — should one occur — would be led by the U.S., an Israeli source said.

The Israeli side is very skeptical that any deal can be reached between the U.S. and Iran, with Trump saying publicly that a good deal would mean “no nuclear weapons, no ballistic missiles,” and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi saying the ballistic missile issue is a nonstarter for Tehran. 

According to a report by Barak Ravid for Israel’s Channel 12, the Trump administration’s views are very close to those on Netanyahu’s team, with a senior American official also believing the Iranians are unlikely to compromise. 

The meeting between the two leaders was “critical,” Ravid quoted the official as saying, because they “need to decide whether to conduct a joint strike if a deal is not reached.” Such a strike would be more likely to succeed if the militaries work together.

One indication of the Trump administration’s pessimism about the talks is the Pentagon’s order, as reported by The Wall Street Journal, for a second aircraft carrier strike group to deploy to the Middle East if negotiations fail, which came after Trump teased the idea earlier this week.

A source in Netanyahu’s delegation said that the prime minister also arrived in Washington with evidence, which he presented to Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner on Tuesday and Trump on Wednesday, that the Iranians lied to the Americans about their intentions in the talks, which they never planned to include ballistic missiles, as well as about stopping the slaughter of anti-regime protesters.

Meanwhile, the U.S. and Iran have yet to set a date for a second round of talks, and the first was under 90 minutes long — with some of that time dedicated to their Omani hosts passing messages back and forth in the indirect talks.

There are few things that Ha’aretz and the pro-Netanyahu Channel 14 agree on, but with American and Iranian officials set to meet for nuclear talks on Friday, there was near wall-to-wall agreement in Israel that the talks are unlikely to bring positive results.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff during his visit to Israel on Tuesday that “Iran proved time after time that its promises cannot be trusted,” according to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.

An Israeli military source told Channel 14 that Netanyahu also warned Witkoff that Iran wants to use the negotiations to “kill time … to transfer offensive weapons to hiding places.”

Witkoff, along with Jared Kushner, are set to represent the U.S. in the talks, which were originally set to be held in Turkey but have reportedly been moved to Oman, and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is expected to lead his country’s negotiating team. Iran has also demanded that the negotiations be limited to its nuclear program, while the U.S. seeks to curb Tehran’s ballistic missile program and support for regional proxies. 

Hours after Witkoff met with Netanyahu on Tuesday, Iran launched a drone at the USS Abraham Lincoln, which the military shot down, and a U.S. ship escaped an Iranian attempt to stop it at sea. 

Jerusalem eyed the move toward negotiations with Iran with skepticism.

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, a member of the Security Cabinet, said on Wednesday, “Let’s admit the truth. There is no value to a diplomatic agreement with Iran.”

“Iran has never kept any of its commitments, and even if it agrees to something, it’ll be a hudna [Arabic for a temporary ceasefire] until Trump is out of office,” Cohen told Israel’s 103FM. 

Cohen said that “Trump is a businessman who wants the bottom line, and therefore he is taking his time to bring it. Our message to the U.S. is that negotiations with Iran are a waste of time.” 

Cohen argued that it is in the interest of the region to see the Islamic Republic fall: “Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE and Azerbaijan told the U.S. ‘don’t attack Iran’ out of fear. It’s clearly lip service.” 

Ehud Ya’ari, the in-house Middle East analyst for Israel’s Channel 12, wrote in an article published Wednesday that the talks will try to reach “an interim arrangement that will relieve the tension without solving the problems.”  

“A move like this is not a good enough solution for Israel,” Ya’ari wrote. “An interim agreement means freezing problems, not solving them.”

At the same time, Ya’ari argued that a broader agreement that will satisfy both Trump and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is impossible, though an interim agreement will also be challenging.

Tamir Hayman, director of the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and former IDF intelligence chief, told Ha’aretz‘s Hebrew podcast “The Week” that “anything is better than an agreement with Iran. …Israel does not want an agreement.” 

“Israel does not want any nuclear program at all, zero enrichment,” Hayman said. “We’ll want limits to missile manufacturing and the export of terror to the Middle East export of arms. … My concern in light of past statements by Witkoff is that … he’s only dealing with nuclear and for him, any compromise on enrichment [is acceptable].” 

Hayman argued that “you can’t bring down a regime that you are negotiating with…Any agreement they reach is a lifeline for the regime.”

However, he added, “even without an attack, [the mullahs] will fall in the end,” citing the tens of thousands of protesters killed and Iranian leadership’s inability to save the country’s collapsing economy. 

Hayman said he used to be opposed to “managing the conflict,” but now he believes that the current situation, in which Iran there is a domestic political and economic crisis and no centrifuges are spinning in Iran, “could be good and increase the chances that it will awaken something inside [Iran].”

Meanwhile, Israelis continued to live under the shadow of threats from Iran’s regime, after over a month of concern that Iran may retaliate for an American strike by attacking Israel. The ad for the latest episode of Eretz Nehederet, Israel’s answer to SNL, opened with host Eyal Kitzis looking bored in the studio with ticking clocks behind him and the message: “So, we are still waiting for Iran to attack.” 

The mass protests across Iran erupted just over two weeks ago — the same day that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Palm Beach, Fla., to meet with President Donald Trump.

The big question as Netanyahu and Trump met was whether the president would give Israel a green light to strike Iran as it reconstituted its ballistic missile program at a pace that raised major concerns in Jerusalem. Trump’s response was a resounding yes, adding that if Iran would start rebuilding its nuclear program, the answer would be yes and “fast.” 

At the same time, Israeli defense figures and officials made it known through the media that Jerusalem’s more immediate worry was that Tehran would misinterpret events and strike Israel first. Netanyahu reportedly told Russian President Vladimir Putin that Israel is not interested in escalating, but Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, appeared to reject the overture in a post on X, saying “the malicious enemy is a deceiving liar.” 

But as the demonstrations in Iran grew and the regime’s response grew more and more violent – Iran International reported 12,000 protesters have been killed as of Tuesday morning, while an Iranian official put the death toll at 2,000 – international talk about Israeli airstrikes subsided to near-silence. 

Asked how Israel’s calculation about striking Iranian missile or nuclear sites may have changed in the last two weeks, former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren told Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov on the “Misgav Mideast Horizons Podcast”: “With the United States threatening to intervene, what would we have to gain from this? Other than providing a pretext for the Iranians to strike back at us. I think we’re operating responsibly, prudently.”

Still, Israelis remain jittery about a second round of war with Iran, to the extent that the IDF’s spokesperson, Brig.-Gen. Effie Defrin, released a statement on Monday evening warning that “in recent days, many rumors have circulated in light of the situation in Iran. …The IDF is prepared defensively and remains on alert for surprise scenarios if required. The protests in Iran are a domestic matter. …We will provide updates if there are any changes. I emphasize: Do not lend a hand to rumors.” 

Hostile actors — like the Hamas-affiliated Palestine Chronicle – misrepresented the Israeli Health Ministry’s distribution on Monday of new emergency preparation instructions incorporating the lessons of June’s 12-day war, as though hospitals were imminently entering emergency mode — even though the ministry’s letter explicitly said there is no need to do so. Other false reports stated that local governments in Israel had opened bomb shelters, leading several municipalities to issue denials. 

Netanyahu said in Sunday’s Cabinet meeting that Israel is “closely monitoring what is happening in Iran. The demonstrations for freedom spread throughout the country. The people of Israel, the whole world, are amazed by the great courage of the citizens of Iran. Israel supports their struggle for freedom and strongly condemns the massacres of innocent civilians. We all hope the Persian people will soon be freed from the yoke of tyranny, and when that day arrives, Israel and Iran will go back to being faithful partners in building a future of prosperity and peace for both nations.”

Yet, hours later, he ordered a media blackout on the topic, silencing Intelligence Minister Gila Gamliel and Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli, who have signaled their support for Reza Pahlavi, son of the deposed Shah.

Oren said that “Israel has only to gain from” the protests. 

As to accusations from the Iranian regime — as well as American extremist podcasters on the right and left — Oren said: “I think Israel, and I say this very guardedly, has the ability to assist the protesters with communications, with information. … Are we providing them with arms? No, Are we saying we’re going to intervene militarily to help bring down the regime? We’re not saying that, and I think that’s why it was prudent to put the kibosh on those ministers who are flexing their muscles publicly vis-a-vis Iran.”

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed winding down U.S. military aid late last year, President Donald Trump was bewildered and did not immediately support the move, two sources familiar with the matter told Jewish Insider. 

Since then, Netanyahu has announced his intentions to move ahead with the plan anyway.

Netanyahu pitched the president on his proposal while visiting Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., in late December, the Israeli prime minister told The Economist in an interview released on Friday. The idea was spearheaded by Ron Dermer, Israel’s former minister of strategic affairs and a top Netanyahu advisor, according to two sources familiar with the matter. 

Dermer has defended the idea to U.S. lawmakers and other officials, arguing that such a move would improve the Jewish state’s embattled reputation in the United States, a claim that Netanyahu repeated to Trump. Since Dermer left government late last year, Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter has become the point person on the matter, a source close to the prime minister told JI.

Netanyahu even suggested that Israel may not take or could return some of the military aid it is set to receive from the U.S. in 2027 and 2028 under the terms of the current memorandum of understanding, one source said.

Trump could not understand why Netanyahu would propose ending American military aid to Israel and disagrees that the move would improve U.S. public opinion on the Jewish state, one source familiar with the president’s perspective told JI. He is skeptical that the plan would benefit either country, but is also not dismissing it out of hand, they said. 

Netanyahu departed Trump’s Palm Beach resort on New Year’s Day without having committed to going through with or abandoning the plan. He continued engaging with U.S. lawmakers about the idea in the week and a half that followed, two congressional sources familiar with the matter said, with Netanyahu ultimately announcing last week that the plan was “in the works.”

“We’ve come of age and we’ve developed incredible capacity,” Netanyahu told The Economist. “And our economy, which will reach, certainly within a decade, will reach about a trillion dollars — it’s not a huge economy, but it’s not a small economy. So I want to taper off military aid within the next 10 years.”

“And that’s not saying that I don’t want to fight for the allegiance and support of the American people — I do, you would have to be crazy not to,” he continued.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly told JI in a statement regarding the meeting that “Israel has had no better friend in its history than President Trump. The administration continues to work closely with our ally Israel to successfully implement the President’s 20 Point Plan for Peace and strengthen regional security in the Middle East. We do not detail the President’s private conversations — any announcements would come from the administration directly.”

The apparent disconnect between the Israeli and U.S. positions on aid comes as the next MOU is being negotiated between the two countries, with the current 10-year agreement coming to an end in 2028. 

One source said they understand Trump to be supportive of continued aid, something the Israelis have miscalculated, because “the president sees the aid relationship as a bridge to potentially restoring American manufacturing; essentially, giving Israel money to invest in the American industrial base.”

Israel receives $3.3 billion annually from the U.S. under the current MOU in foreign military financing, which usually must be used to purchase American defense products and services. Israel is unique in that it is allowed to use a portion of its FMF for domestic procurement, a benefit that is set to be phased out by the MOU’s end in 2028.

The other $500 million that Israel receives annually under the MOU is earmarked for joint missile-defense programs, such as Iron Dome, David’s Sling and the Arrow systems, which is appropriated directly to the Department of Defense, similarly to other U.S.-Israel cooperative programs including anti-tunneling and drone initiatives. This method of funding, appropriated to the U.S. government rather than directly to Israel, could be expanded to replace FMF if it is wound down.

Likud lawmaker Amit Halevi, who has been the primary engine within the party pushing to phase out U.S. military aid, told JI that the model Israel has been presenting to the Trump administration and on Capitol Hill is this one of “joint projects and investments.” 

While Netanyahu has not detailed what he thinks phasing out U.S. aid would entail, Halevi’s proposal involves shifting to jointly funded research and development projects in defense, cybersecurity and intelligence.

Halevi said that Netanyahu “has a list of things he wants to get done before the next election,” which is officially set for late October but could take place sooner, and that an “MOU that he sees as an achievement” is likely on that list.

The Likud MK has led multiple Knesset subcommittee meetings on the matter, in which representatives from Dermer’s office said they were seriously discussing changing the military aid model.

Halevi argued that Netanyahu’s remarks in The Economist interview are unique in that it is the first time the prime minister is saying he wants Israel to eventually receive no aid at all.

Two of Netanyahu’s spokespeople, however, said that Netanyahu’s position is not new, citing his comments to conservative commentator Ben Shapiro in October and Australian journalist Erin Molan in November. In both interviews, Netanyahu recounted that he phased out American financial aid to Israel in his first term in office in 1996, and that he intends to do the same for military aid.

“I am committed to making Israel as fully self-sufficient as possible,” Netanyahu told Shapiro. “We can transform our military defense industry, make a quantum jump to be able to be self-sufficient and to share with America the extraordinary developments that we have.” 

Netanyahu also said in a Cabinet meeting in May that “we receive close to $4 billion for arms. I think we will have to wean ourselves off of American security aid.” 

His spokespeople had no further comment when asked if anything had changed in light of Netanyahu’s meeting with Trump in December.

Last March, Leiter canceled a meeting with Halevi over his advocacy on the Hill against continuing aid. Weeks earlier, Leiter pulled out of a Heritage Foundation event due to the publication of a paper that called for the gradual elimination of U.S. aid to Israel.

Yet, in September, reflecting the shift in Israel’s position, Leiter told JI that “the nature of any MOU or collaborative effort is going to change,” and it may consist of “greater [joint] research and development between our two countries, rather than relying on American weapons.”  

One American source familiar with the negotiations said, “The Israelis just have to come in and ask for what they need and stop trying to figure out what the U.S. wants to hear.” 

Following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement that Israel seeks to wean itself off of U.S. aid within next 10 years, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Jewish Insider he will push forward an effort to end U.S. aid more quickly — a major shift from one of Israel’s closest allies on Capitol Hill.

“From my point of view as an American, now that this decision has been made, I don’t think we need to wait 10 years,” Graham, who chairs the State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs (SFOPs) subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said. “I’m going to work on expediting the wind down of the aid and recommend we plow the money back into our own military.”

The majority of direct U.S. military aid to Israel — $3.3 billion annually through the U.S.-Israel memorandum of understanding — comes through the SFOPs budget package. An additional $500 million in cooperative missile defense funding for co-produced systems is provided through the Defense funding tranche, along with funds for other cooperative programs.

The current MOU guaranteeing $3.8 billion per year expires in 2028.

Graham said that he wants to see the funding redirected into the U.S. military, in light of President Donald Trump’s plan, announced this week, to request $1.5 trillion for the Pentagon for 2027, a more than 50% increase over the 2025 budget.

“President Trump’s budget request of $1.5 trillion for [the] Department of War is a major increase, and every dollar we can recoup, from efficiency or allies who don’t need the money anymore, is welcome to go into building up our military,” Graham said. “Israel’s a great friend and a marvelous military, but we’re the only superpower in the world. America and the demands on us are at an all-time high because of the threats. The American military is the best in the world and in great demand. So what I think is best for America, now that Israel has made this decision, is to expedite this money, plowing it back into our own military needs.”

Netanyahu’s announcement came at a time of rising criticism of U.S. aid to Israel on both sides of the aisle.

But Graham argued that — if Israeli leaders believe that winding down U.S. aid will help rebuild support for the Jewish state among those who are critical of Israel — they are likely mistaken. He added that he’d communicated that view to Israeli leaders, but they pushed ahead anyway.

“From a political point of view, if people in Israel think this will get more support in America, I doubt it. I don’t think people who support Israel and understand its vital role object to the aid, which is a small fraction of our budget, and I don’t think you get any credit from people who think Israel is a liability by reducing our military assistance,” Graham said. “I made that position clear, but Israel is a sovereign nation, a great friend. I respect their decision.”

The South Carolina senator said that he “respect[s]” Netanyahu’s decision, adding “As an American, you’re always appreciating allies that can be more self-sufficient.”

Graham described the U.S. funding for Israel as a “great investment” for U.S. national security which has ultimately saved American taxpayer funding and filled capacities the U.S. would otherwise struggle to achieve.

“The investment we’ve made into the IDF has been a great investment for our national security. We have no better ally than Israel. The more capable they are, the safer America [is],” Graham said. “So I’ve always seen this money going to the IDF as investing in a very capable partner being able to do things that we can’t do at a fairly small price. It would be hard for America, if not impossible, to replicate some of the things the Israeli military and intelligence community can do because of location and expertise.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement earlier this month that his military secretary, Maj.-Gen. Roman Gofman, would become head of the Mossad, came as a surprise to the public, as journalists and experts had been confident that current Mossad chief David Barnea’s deputy, known only as “A,” had the job in all but name.

However, for those who know Gofman, his time in the IDF and his working relationship with Netanyahu, as well as the prime minister’s post-Oct. 7 predilection for bringing in outside candidates to take over defense institutions, Gofman was a natural choice.

Netanyahu appeared on Sunday before the committee that will determine whether Gofman’s appointment is finalized, and IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and Gofman himself are expected to speak to the committee this week. Should the committee approve Gofman, he will enter the role in June.

Gofman has a limited public profile as Netanyahu’s senior military advisor. But in Israel, his face is fairly familiar, as he can be seen walking behind Netanyahu into the Oval Office and other high-level meetings, even as military secretaries don’t make public statements. 

Gofman, 49, was born in Belarus, then part of the Soviet Union, and immigrated to Israel with his family at the age of 14. He was bullied in school and took up boxing to fight back, becoming the second-ranked young boxer in Israel in his weight category. He enlisted in the IDF Armored Corps in 1995 and has been in the military ever since, rising to the rank of Aluf, or major general. 

In October 2022, Gofman was appointed commander of the National Center for Ground Training. A year later, when Hamas invaded southern Israel, Gofman drove from his home in Ashdod towards the Gaza border, without a bulletproof vest or a helmet. He took on Hamas terrorists at the Sha’ar HaNegev Junction, killing two and sustaining a severe wound to his knee, after which he found Israeli police officers nearby who took him to the hospital. In his first public remarks after the battle, he said: “We failed. … Now we’ll go forward and kill them all.” 

Netanyahu chose Gofman as his military secretary in 2024, and he became one of the prime minister’s closest and most trusted advisors. As such, Gofman was a central figure in Israel’s decision to work with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to distribute food to civilians in Gaza, among other high-level moves. 

Netanyahu has sent Gofman on multiple trips to Moscow for discussions on security matters, following the fall of former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, and Gofman is said to have played a key role in shaping Israel’s policies relating to Syria since then. 

Maj.-Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen, who knows Gofman well from their years in the IDF, told Jewish Insider that “Gofman did what no military secretary has done in history. … Thanks to Roman, [Netanyahu] made significant decisions in running the war and … circumvent[ed] a system that sometimes leaves out the prime minister.”

Gofman, Hacohen said, “has strategic vision. Syria came as a surprise, and he had a decisive role in the decision [for the IDF] to go in.”

Hacohen said that Gofman’s background, as an immigrant from the former Soviet Union, is an advantage: “He knows that America is not the whole world and there are other forces we need to talk to and understand in depth.” 

Several of Gofman’s current and former colleagues spoke to JI about the new appointee on condition of anonymity. They painted a picture of a passionate Israeli patriot who is well-read and informed on military history and international affairs, while being pragmatic and able to translate that knowledge into an operational approach. They said that Gofman is creative and takes initiative, but is also a good listener, who is willing to accept criticism and alternatives to his own ideas.

In the prime minister’s announcement of Gofman’s appointment as head of the Mossad, Netanyahu called him “an officer of great merit,” and praised his “significant involvement in the seven theaters of the war,” – meaning Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran – as well as his work with all intelligence and security services, including the Mossad.

“Maj.-Gen. Gofman has demonstrated creativity, initiative, stratagem, deep recognition of the enemy, absolute discretion, and the safeguarding of secrets,” the statement from the Prime Minister’s Office reads. “These qualities, as well as his leadership and courage, were evident at the outbreak of the War of Redemption, when he rushed from his home and fought in person against Hamas terrorists in the Western Negev, where he was severely wounded.”

Following the announcement, critics of Netanyahu — mostly in the media, not in the Knesset — made the argument that Gofman does not have the experience in intelligence to head the Mossad. 

Prominent left-wing activist and pundit Yariv Oppenheimer, a former leader of Peace Now, was one of many who argued that Gofman’s close relationship with Netanyahu made him suspect.

“I don’t know this general … but I care about the big picture, which is that Netanyahu is treating this country like it’s his personal property. He wants a Mossad chief who is loyal to him before the country,” Oppenheimer said on a panel on Israeli public broadcaster Kan. “This is an unnatural appointment, and when something is not natural, it raises questions.” 

Hacohen rejected the argument that Gofman is “loyal to the king and not the kingdom. It’s nonsense, because the king is the kingdom. They go together.” 

Historically, some of the Mossad’s best-known leaders came from outside the organization, including Meir Amit, Zvi Zamir and Meir Dagan, the latter of whom not only came from outside the Mossad, but was a leading figure in former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s 2001 election campaign. Hacohen noted that the “the best intelligence agency in the world, the MI6,” also often has leaders recruited from outside the organization.

Hacohen also argued that Gofman learned “unique and significant” things about Israel’s broader security picture as Netanyahu’s military secretary, including the role of the Mossad, and that the job of the head of the Mossad is to “connect people with micro-experience, while seeing the macro.” 

Sources who worked with Gofman have cited his creativity and his willingness to stand up to his superiors and against conventional wisdom. Hacohen said that Gofman “challenged the system everywhere he went. … He had the ambition and desire to ask questions and do better.”

In 2019, Gofman argued for greater deployment of IDF ground forces in sensitive arenas, which, six years later, was one of the conclusions the IDF drew following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel. His remarks were made at a conference of IDF officers with departing Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, now a Knesset member. In footage of his remarks, Herzi Halevi and Aharon Haliva, who served as IDF chief of staff and head of intelligence, respectively, on Oct. 7, can be seen in the audience.

“We are ready to fight, but there is one problem,” Gofman said at the time. “You are not using us. Over time a very problematic pattern has developed, which is essentially the avoidance of using ground forces. And still, in the current reality, we have a lot to offer in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria … Time after time, [the IDF tells] people we have more relevant tools [than ground troops].” 

Gofman’s critics also cite an incident from his time as commander of the IDF’s 210th “Bashan” Division, which is responsible for the front with Syria, that may be especially relevant in his new position as head of the Mossad, as it pertains to his treatment of spies.

Gofman authorized intelligence officers under his command to enlist then-17-year-old Ori Elmakayes, who was fluent in Arabic and ran a Telegram channel and other social media pages with news about the Arab world. The intelligence officers sent him classified information to publish online in an attempted influence operation, even though Gofman and the Bashan Division were not authorized to engage in psychological warfare.

Elmakayes was arrested by Israeli authorities in 2022 for publishing classified information and jailed for nearly two years, after which the indictment was dropped when the investigation found that the intelligence officers were working with Gofman’s approval. 

After Gofman’s appointment as head of the Mossad was announced, Elmakayes posted on X that “Gofman abandoned me after initiating an operation in which I was used … Following his abandonment, I was falsely imprisoned … After he used me and ruined my life, Roman Gofman had no problem distancing himself from me despite knowing what I experienced. Such a person cannot be the head of the Mossad. If he abandoned me, what will stop him from abandoning Mossad agents if God forbid they get in trouble in different operations?” 

The same year that he launched the influence operation with Elmakayes, Gofman wrote a paper for an IDF journal stating that commanders can act beyond their formal authority to enact the will of policymakers, citing the work of the contemporary Marxist philosopher Slavoj Žižek. 

Another controversial paper by Gofman came to light after he was appointed Mossad chief: In 2019, he suggested in a paper for the IDF-run Israel National Defense College — where he received a master’s degree in political science and national security in cooperation with Haifa University — that, should Iran get too close to developing nuclear weapons, Israel should threaten to sell nuclear weapons to neighboring countries, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, to balance the region.

Gofman leads an outwardly secular lifestyle, but after growing up in the Soviet Union, he sought an education in Judaism and Zionism as an adult.

Gofman told Ynet military reporter Yossi Yehoshua that when he was in the IDF officers’ course, Gofman realized he did not know Israel’s national anthem, “Hatikva,” by heart. “I started to feel like I had no depth in the Zionist, Israeli subject, that there are a lot of things the soldiers could ask and I won’t know how to explain. … It shook me. I was going to be an IDF officer and I was missing so much. I was carrying this vacuum since my aliyah.” 

During his undergraduate studies, Gofman also began studying at the Bnei David Pre-Military Academy in Eli, the flagship religious-Zionist institution, for a year of Torah study between completing high school and starting IDF service, many of whose alumni have climbed the IDF ranks. 

“They accepted me as I was, without a kippah,” Gofman recalled. “I built a curriculum and came to study one day a week about Zionism, Israel, history, to explain to myself, first and foremost, who I am and what I am.”

“Only then did I suddenly feel that I have two feet on the ground, but a head in the sky. I know how to explain the Zionist idea,” he said.

A former colleague of Gofman said that he is “very well-connected to his roots, because he went through a personal process to connect to them. He knows how to make war, but he also knows what it’s for, the deeper ideology behind it.” 

“To fight for Israel,” Hacohen said of Gofman’s search for meaning in his Judaism, “you need faith. We, in the Land of Israel, have many struggles. If those who came from the former Soviet Union were looking for a safe place, why would they come here? This is not just a place for fun or safety, it’s for the liberation of the Jewish people.”

President Donald Trump will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Dec. 29 at the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fl., according to the Prime Minister’s Office. 

Netanyahu is expected to depart Israel on Dec. 28 and return on Jan. 3 after Shabbat, meaning that the prime minister will begin 2026 stateside. Palm Beach is the only expected stop during the trip, according to the Israeli outlet Maariv. 

It will be the two leaders’ fifth meeting in the U.S. this year — they have already met four times at the White House during Trump’s second term, most recently on Sep. 29 when they held initial discussions on the 20-point peace plan for Gaza. 

Neither side has commented on the meeting agenda for the conversation later this month; however, it is likely to include topics such as the implementation of the next phase of the peace deal, which consists of determining which countries may contribute to an international stabilization force and the Palestinian technocratic government to sit below the Trump-led “Board of Peace,” among other issues.  

Trump is expected to announce the members of the committee and the board before Christmas. 

Talks could also touch on Hezbollah rearmament in Lebanon and efforts to reach a potential security agreement in Syria. 

The Trump administration has sought to avoid a reignition of hostilities between Israel and the Lebanese-based terrorist group, and brokered the first direct diplomatic talks since 1993 between Jerusalem and Beirut last Wednesday in an effort to de-escalate tensions. However, reports indicate that Hezbollah is continuing to re-arm, threatening a fragile ceasefire. 

White House officials have also expressed concern this month that Israeli strikes in Syria could undermine a potential security agreement between the two countries, and Trump issued a warning to Israel on social media not to “interfere” in Syria and to maintain a “strong and true dialogue” on the same day he invited Netanyahu to the U.S. 

The last time Trump and Netanyahu met at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach was in July 2024, in the midst of the U.S. presidential election. 

Israel’s influential minister of strategic affairs, Ron Dermer, resigned from his post on Tuesday, three years after assuming the role.

“This government will be defined both by the attack on October 7th and by the prosecution of the two-year, seven-front, war that followed,” Dermer, widely regarded as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s closest advisor, wrote in his resignation letter.

Israeli media had reported for months that Dermer’s departure was expected.

Dermer noted that he had initially promised his family to work in the position for two years only, but extended his tenure twice, with their blessing, “first to work with you [Netanyahu] to remove the existential threat posed by Iran’s military nuclear capability and second to end the war in Gaza on Israel’s terms and bring our hostages home.” 

Dermer has led Israel’s ceasefire and hostage-release negotiations since February. He is expected to stay on as Netanyahu’s envoy to continue handling the future of the Gaza portfolio, political sources recently told Jewish Insider. U.S.-born and a former Israeli ambassador to Washington, Dermer has long played a central role in managing Israel’s relationship with the U.S.

“What the future holds for me, I do not know. But I do know this: No matter what I do, I will continue to do my part to help secure the future of the Jewish people,” Dermer said.

Jewish Insider’s Lahav Harkov contributed to this report.

Former White House communications director Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci has a message for Israeli leaders: Be careful not to get too chummy with President Donald Trump, “because he burned everybody.”

“If you’re an Israeli politician, be careful because you think he’s your friend. He’s not your friend,” Scaramucci said in an interview with Jewish Insider on Friday. “He’s only using you for his own self-interest. And the minute you no longer become useful to him, he will drop you like a hot potato in a very detached, narcissistic way.”

Scaramucci remained one of Trump’s strongest defenders even after he was fired from the White House job he held for a mere 11 days. But in recent weeks, Scaramucci has heavily criticized the president on a media tour, using harsh terms to describe his character after Trump called him “a highly unstable nut job” in a tweet last month.

The former West Wing staffer suggested that the firing of National Security Advisor John Bolton last week is “just a continuation of the pathological mania of [Trump’s] personality… If you’re getting better press than him, if you’re better looking than him or if you’re more talented than him, he’ll try to drop you in his personal fire to appease himself. He makes sacrifices of loyal people into the Trump personal volcano because he has very low self esteem.” 

Scaramucci warned that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could soon feel Trump’s wrath as well. “How do you think that [Trump] wouldn’t turn on [Netanyahu] given the track record of 51 people who have departed the White House and 81 people who have departed the administration?” he asked rhetorically. “He turns on political leaders on a dime, unless they’re dictators like [Vladimir] Putin or Kim [Jong-Un]. Of course he would turn on him.”

Following his short tenure in the White House, Scaramucci visited Israel four times. Several trips were organized by Orthodox Jewish groups supportive of the president. 

Asked if he has lost any friendships in the Orthodox community over his strong opposition to Trump, Scaramucci said, “I don’t know. If I have lost friendships in the Orthodox community because of my honest assessment of the full-blown maniacal craziness that is taking place right now from the American presidency, then they were never my friends in the first place.”

“You know and I know that you have a small handful of friends in life,” Scaramucci continued. “And so if Orthodox Jews want to hold a blind eye to the full-blown mania and craziness that is taking place at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now because the president did some things that we all like — like move the embassy and other things that he did to help Israel — I think it’s mistaken. I think it’s a mistaken assessment and it’s misplaced support.”

Scaramucci also criticized Trump for accusing the Democratic Party of being anti-Israel. “I’m a Zionist. I believe in the State of Israel and I want there to be a permanent alliance between the United States and the State of Israel. So in order for that to exist, we have to make sure that the alliance with Israel and our sanctity as allies is bipartisan,” he explained. “I don’t think anybody can say that they’re anti-Israel,” he added, referencing President Barack Obama’s funding of the Iron Dome and the 10-year MOU signed in 2016.

Scaramucci recently announced that he is forming a new political action committee (PAC) to defeat Trump. He told JI that there is no chance of a ceasefire with the president, even predicting that Trump might be replaced by another Republican on the ballot next year. “I predict that I will be supporting the Republican nominee in November of 2020 and that Republican will not be Donald Trump. That’s my prediction,” he stated confidently. 

Scaramucci is not yet ready to commit to supporting any of the other three Republican candidates: former congressman and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford; one-term former Rep. Joe Walsh; and former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld.

“There’s a couple of more weeks, there are several Republicans that need to make a decision and let’s see where they land in terms of where their decisions are. Let’s see how it shapes out before I commit to anything,” he said. “I will be working over the next 14 months to make sure that [Trump is] a one-term president. I’m a very organized guy. I’m in the process of raising a PAC. I know where to put the money in the swing states to defeat him as president. He cannot be the president for another five years.”