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

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK

Hiding under a table at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner

‘Two thoughts ran through my head. The main one: I’m getting married in six days. I can’t die now. The second: I can’t believe this is happening to me again’

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Abdul El-Sayed brings in campaign cash from head of Hamas-cheering group

The Michigan Senate contender accepted $7k from the chair of Al-Awda/PRRC — and hired her son

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

SHAPIRO SPOTLIGHT

Josh Shapiro supports U.S. aid to Israel, but calls to use it as leverage

In an interview with JI, Shapiro said he ‘[hasn’t] really thought about’ whether he would appear on Hasan Piker’s stream but that he hasn’t been invited

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

DEFINITION DEBATE

Mamdani won’t set definition of antisemitism after repealing IHRA, his antisemitism czar says

In testimony before the City Council’s antisemitism task force, an NYPD official said Mamdani played no role in a controversial change in reporting data from hate crimes

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

The first round of direct talks between Israel and Lebanon has been received positively by diplomats, pro-Israel lawmakers and experts, who see it as a sign of Hezbollah’s waning influence in Lebanon. But despite the optimism surrounding the discussions, experts caution that disarming the terrorist group remains a daunting obstacle that stands in the way of any meaningful change — one that would require a significant shift from the Lebanese government and its armed forces.

On Tuesday, Israeli and Lebanese leadership convened at the State Department in Washington for the highest-level direct discussions in more than 30 years, aiming to outline a framework for “lasting peace” and a “permanent end” to Hezbollah’s influence, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.  

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) told Jewish Insider that “it is great” that talks are taking place, expressing hope that “the Lebanese government, the United States and the Israeli government make a deal, and collectively, they push Hezbollah out.”

“That way the Lebanese people can be freed from the Iranian extremism that they have in their country,” Moskowitz said. “The Lebanese people are being held captive by the Iranian government because of Hezbollah. It’s obviously good for the United States, it’s good for Israel, but more importantly, I think it’s good for the people of Lebanon. I think disarming Hezbollah is obviously key to all this.”

Moskowitz added that while the Lebanese government appears to want to disarm Hezbollah, “they probably need help.”

“It’s not going to happen overnight, but I think it’s historic, and this is what the entire region wants,” he said. “This is what the Gulf states want. Everybody wants to come out of the extremism and the terrorism that Iran is trying to spread in the region.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) similarly told JI that Hezbollah disarmament is an important factor in talks. 

“Why would you have talks if they [Hezbollah] are not going to disarm?” Scott said. “I’m not the prime minister of Israel but my condition would be that Hezbollah has got to disarm.”

Scott dismissed the notion that the Lebanese government and the Lebanese Armed Forces have not done enough to disarm the group, stating that the main problem is “not caused by Lebanon or by the military of Lebanon, it’s caused by Hezbollah.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said that disarming Hezbollah should be a “red line” for Israel in talks. He added that Israel “needs a buffer zone so Hezbollah can’t continue to rain down terror on Israelis.”

“Hezbollah has historically been the best trained, best equipped opponents to Israel,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) said. “Israel’s done a great job with them over the last two years, but they’re hardcore fervent believers in destroying Israel.” 

Experts similarly described the talks as a meaningful development. John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, called the discussions an “important breakthrough” and a sign of Hezbollah’s diminishing influence.

“Everyone should welcome the opening of a direct political dialogue between Israel and Lebanon,” Hannah said. “The fact that [the talks are] occurring at all is an important sign of Hezbollah’s declining hegemony over the Lebanese state.”

Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, described the talks as a “win-win-win” in a social media post, adding that Hezbollah emerged as a “big loser.”

“Today is a day to celebrate — we all saw a glimpse of what is possible after so much violence and conflict,” Satloff wrote on Tuesday. “That is a very good thing.”

Still, experts say disarming Hezbollah, which parties agree is necessary for any lasting piece, remains highly difficult and uncertain.

Even before Tuesday’s opening round of discussions, Hezbollah senior member Wafiq Safa said Hezbollah is “not bound” by any deals reached between Israel, Lebanon and the United States.

“It’s hard to be an optimist when it comes to the core question of Hezbollah’s disarmament,” Hannah said. “Even after all that’s been done over the past few years to weaken the group and its Iranian sponsors — including the loss of its legitimacy in the eyes of a majority of Lebanese — it’s not at all apparent that the raw balance of forces inside Lebanon has shifted sufficiently to favor Hezbollah’s near-term demise.”

Hannah described disarming Hezbollah as “worth trying,” but ultimately a “long shot.”

“Since the war against Iran broke out on Feb. 28, Hezbollah has shown through its sustained attacks on Israel that, while much diminished, its forces retain far more significant capabilities than many believed,” he said. “And in the wake of its battle against Israel, Hezbollah is making clear that if push comes to shove, it’s prepared to burn down the state before surrendering its weapons.”

Blaise Misztal, JINSA’s vice president for policy, said the task cannot be accomplished through Israeli military action alone and will ultimately depend on whether Lebanon and the LAF are willing to act.

“[Disarming Hezbollah] can only be fully done by a strong and committed Lebanese government,” Misztal said. “Israel can secure southern Lebanon with ground operations and strike Hezbollah sites in Beirut or the Bekaa Valley, but that will merely distance and degrade the threat, never fully remove it.”

“The question is whether the Lebanese government is, or can be convinced to be, strong and committed enough to take on the task of asserting its control over its own territory,” he added. “Thus far, it has failed to demonstrate either the political will or military capability to do so.”

Hannah similarly noted that “Israel is rightly unwilling to pay the necessary cost in blood, treasure and diplomatic opprobrium” required to fully dismantle Hezbollah, leaving the responsibility to Lebanon and its armed forces.

“The factor that has truly held Lebanon back from disarming Hezbollah has been Hezbollah’s retention of, as far as we can tell, overwhelming support among Lebanese Shiites,” David Daoud, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said. “Having retained that popular support, it can deter the government from pursuing forcible disarmament by dangling the threat of civil war.”

But experts weren’t optimistic that the Lebanese government and LAF are capable — or willing — to take on that role. Hannah said Lebanon’s military “doesn’t appear to have the stomach to truly confront Hezbollah and dismantle the group’s armed wing,” noting that it has already “failed” to disarm the group in southern Lebanon, “much less the rest of the country.”

“It seems even less likely than before the Iran war that the LAF would now be willing to take on the risk of massively confronting Hezbollah,” he said, “in spite of the misery Hezbollah’s unilateral decision to enter the conflict on Iran’s behalf is now inflicting on the rest of Lebanon.”

David Daoud, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, also said Beirut “ultimately holds the key” to resolving the issue of Hezbollah’s disarmament. He said that while Lebanon has taken “immense and commendable” steps in “proscribing Hezbollah’s military activities,” the country’s “unwillingness to act against Hezbollah has been missing from the equation” and has “allowed the group to regenerate in the past.”

He added that Hezbollah still “retains enough military strength to make disarmament daunting” for Lebanese forces and the LAF, and that the group continues to wield significant political power.

“The factor that has truly held Lebanon back from disarming Hezbollah has been Hezbollah’s retention of, as far as we can tell, overwhelming support among Lebanese Shiites,” Daoud said. “Having retained that popular support, it can deter the government from pursuing forcible disarmament by dangling the threat of civil war.”

Daoud also raised concerns about Lebanon’s intentions in negotiations, arguing that Beirut may not truly be seeking meaningful change.

“A good test will be the extent to which the LAF fulfills the Lebanese government’s order from early April to put all of Beirut under its full control,” John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, said. “Will the LAF truly confront and disarm Hezbollah in the capital or simply repeat the phony disarmament it claimed to have completed in the south?”

“Lebanon is seeking to use the negotiations to return to the status quo, and is willing to ‘pay the price’ of a joint photograph with an Israeli ambassador to achieve that objective,” he said. “This is because the situation in Lebanon is indeed dire — economic collapse compounded by war, the direct impact of the war itself and the emergence of sectarian tensions that could boil over into full-on conflict.”

If those dynamics remain unchanged, he warned that Hezbollah could indefinitely delay disarmament and eventually rebuild its strength.

“A good test will be the extent to which the LAF fulfills the Lebanese government’s order from early April to put all of Beirut under its full control,” Hannah said. “Will the LAF truly confront and disarm Hezbollah in the capital or simply repeat the phony disarmament it claimed to have completed in the south?”

Satloff said the challenge will ultimately require translating diplomacy into “practical steps,” including a shift in how the Lebanese military approaches disarmament.

“While some of this can happen in the negotiating room when the parties meet again, nothing can substitute for strong measures by the Lebanese state to isolate, weaken, delegitimize and disarm Hezbollah while promoting the idea of peace,” he said.

He suggested that turning Beirut into a “true weapons-free zone” is necessary “but not sufficient,” pointing to additional steps such as removing Hezbollah officials from government, expelling Iranian operatives from the country and shutting down the group’s financial and institutional networks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announced a last-minute trip to Washington on Wednesday to discuss talks between the U.S. and Iran, a day after President Donald Trump praised the negotiations with Tehran.

“The Prime Minister believes any negotiations must include limitations on ballistic missiles and a halting of the support for the Iranian axis,” the statement, sent Saturday night, read.

White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Oman on Friday.

Later Friday, Trump told reporters on Air Force One that the talks had been “very good.” 

“Iran looks like it wants to make a deal very badly,” he said. “We have to see what that deal is, but I think Iran wants to make a deal very badly, like they should. Last time, they didn’t want to make a deal, but I think this time they feel differently.”

Asked about Iran’s demand that the talks only be about nuclear weapons, Trump said, “That would be acceptable. One thing, right up front, no nuclear weapons. … They weren’t willing to do that [last year]; now they are willing to do much more.” 

The president also said that he is in “no rush” in the negotiations, adding, “If you remember in Venezuela, we waited around for a while.”

Trump indicated that the military threat to Iran still stands: “We have a big armada, a big fleet heading in that direction that will be there soon, so we’ll see how that works out. … If they don’t make a deal, the consequences are very steep.” 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) expressed skepticism that the negotiations would bring about an acceptable agreement, and called for Congressional review and approval, which the 2015 Iran nuclear deal lacked. 

“I hope it can meet our national security objectives and the needs of the people of Iran through diplomacy,” Graham wrote on X. “Given Iran’s behavior regarding deals, it could be a tough sell. However, I am open-minded, understanding [that] any agreement with the Islamic Republic and the United States must come to Congress for review and a vote.” 

Meanwhile, in Iran, videos and photos were posted online of Iranians once again protesting the regime using methods other than mass demonstrations, The Wall Street Journal reported, including shouting slogans at funerals, doctors condemning the arrest of colleagues for treating wounded protesters, hosting memorials for wounded protesters and more. 

For a brief moment on Wednesday, it looked like Iran talks were off. Tehran wanted to move their location from Turkey to Oman and narrow the scope of the negotiations to its nuclear program. The Trump administration saw this as a bad sign, and anonymous American officials began leaking to the media that Iran wasn’t taking the negotiations seriously.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged that the negotiations were uncertain in remarks to the press at the Critical Minerals Ministerial, a conference of 43 foreign and other ministers: “As far as the talks are concerned, I think the Iranians had agreed to a certain format. For whatever reason, it changed … We’ll see if we can get back to the right place. The U.S. is prepared to meet them,” he said.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump relayed a warning to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a prerecorded interview with NBC News: “I would say he should be very worried.”

It didn’t take long – just over two hours, to be precise – between the news of the apparent collapse of talks between the U.S. and Iran and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s announcement on X that they were back on: “Nuclear talks with the United States are scheduled to be held in Muscat on about 10 am Friday.” Anonymous American sources then confirmed to various media that negotiations were set to take place, after leaders of Arab and Muslim countries urged the Trump administration to give them a chance, despite Iran’s prevarications.

Still, Araghchi’s statement alludes to one of the major reasons that the talks were, briefly, called off: Are they only “nuclear talks” or are they about a range of malign behavior by the Islamic Republic? 

The Iranian answer to that question is clear, but the Trump administration sent mixed messages.

The Trump interview with NBC provided few clues. The president expressed support for the protesters against the Iranian regime, saying “we’ve had their back.” 

Yet, in a bit of revisionist history, he portrayed his recent threats to Iran as being solely about the nuclear file: “They were thinking of starting a new [nuclear] site in a different part of the country. We found out about it and said, ‘you do that, we’re going to do very bad things to you,'” Trump said. He didn’t mention ballistic missiles in the interview.

Rubio, however, specified that “as far as the topics [of negotiations] and what the agenda needs to be, I think that in order for talks to actually lead to something meaningful, they will have to include certain things, and that includes the range of their ballistic missiles, that includes the sponsorship of terrorist organizations across the region, that includes the nuclear program and that includes the treatment of their own people.”

“Beyond that,” Rubio said, “the president retains a number of options as to how to respond to [the violent crackdown on protesters] and future events.”

Vice President JD Vance told Megyn Kelly that stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon was the main concern: “In a perfect world, would I love it if a bunch of freedom-loving Iranians… had a government that was much more friendly to the United States of America? Would that be a good thing? Absolutely.”

“But fundamentally,” he added, “the president has been focused …  on this question of ensuring that they don’t get a nuclear weapon. .. I feel 100% confident that even if the Iranians were rushing toward a nuclear weapon, they couldn’t get one during the Trump administration. But we’re not thinking about the next three years; we’re thinking about the next 30 years.” 

Vance argued that “global nuclear proliferation” is “the biggest threat to the world,” and as such, Trump is seeking to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons so that other countries in the region do not seek to attain them, as well, and is willing to work with unfriendly countries like Russia and China to achieve that because it is “the most important thing you can do for peace and stability.” 

The lack of clarity is reason for concern in Jerusalem, where the line on any potential American agreement with Iran, going back to the Obama-era negotiations, has long been zero enrichment and extensive limitations on ballistic missiles and regional proxy activity. 

Israel regarded U.S.-Iran negotiations with deep skepticism even before the latest bumps on the road to Oman, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu telling 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.” Talks that do not include missiles and proxies will likely be viewed with alarm. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, hostage families and others in Israel expressed cautious optimism over the weekend, after Hamas agreed to enter talks to free the 48 remaining hostages in exchange for a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

An Israeli team consisting of Strategic Minister Ron Dermer, diplomatic advisor Ophir Falk, Coordinator for the Hostages and Missing Gal Hirsch and representatives of the Mossad and Shin Bet are expected to head to Cairo on Monday for proximity talks to negotiate the implementation of President Donald Trump’s 20-step plan to end the war. Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, who has been involved in the talks, will represent the U.S.

Netanyahu said in a video statement Saturday night that Israel and the U.S. intend to “limit this negotiation to a few days” and that it would be about “technical details” of the Trump plan. 

“We will not tolerate any more delay tactics, time-wasting or evasion on the part of Hamas,” he said. 

As Trump noted on Truth Social, the ceasefire would immediately take effect once it is agreed to by Hamas. The terror group would have to release the remaining 48 hostages – 20 of whom are thought to be alive – in exchange for Israel’s freeing of over 1,700 Palestinian prisoners, hundreds of whom are serving life sentences on terrorism charges, and the rest arrested in Gaza in the last two years. Then, Israel would withdraw to an initial line, as part of a gradual withdrawal toward a buffer zone along Gaza’s perimeter. 

The details likely to be negotiated include the precise line to which Israel will withdraw initially and, at the end of the process, which countries will make up the International Stabilization Force meant to be the “long-term internal security solution” to keep Gaza demilitarized and prevent the resurgence of terrorism, according to the Trump plan, and who will be part of the transitional technocratic committee meant to govern Gaza. Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan are expected to be involved in the Peace Board led by Trump that will oversee the transitional government.

Netanyahu vowed that “Hamas will be disarmed and the Strip demilitarized. This will happen either via a diplomatic route, according to the Trump plan, or via a military route by us.” 

The talks come after Hamas released a statement early Saturday in which it embraced parts of the Trump plan — exchanging Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners, an influx of aid and encouraging Palestinians to remain in Gaza — but rejected the concessions the plan would entail, including the demilitarization and deradicalization of Gaza. Hamas said it would punt that decision to “a collective national position … to be discussed within a comprehensive Palestinian national framework, in which Hamas will be included.” 

Despite Hamas accepting only a fraction of his plan, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he believes the terrorist group is “ready for a lasting PEACE” and called on Israel to “immediately stop the bombing of Gaza so that we can get the hostages out safely and quickly.” 

IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir then “instructed to advance readiness for the implementation of the first phase of the Trump plan for the release of the hostages,” according to an IDF statement early Saturday morning. At the same time, Zamir said, “all troops must maintain high alertness and vigilance, in addition to reinforcing the need for a rapid response to neutralize any threat.”

In his video statement, Netanyahu presented Trump’s plan as being coordinated with Jerusalem. “As a result of the intense military pressure we applied and the diplomatic pressure, Hamas was pressured into agreeing to the plan we presented,” Netanyahu said.

The prime minister added that “we are on the verge of a very great achievement. … It is not yet final; we are working on it diligently, and I hope, with G-d’s help, that in the coming days, during the Sukkot holiday, I will be able to inform you about the return of all our hostages, both living and deceased, in one phase, while the IDF remains deep within the Strip and in the controlling areas within it.”

Tel Aviv’s Hostage Square was filled with demonstrators on Saturday night, calling for the deal to be implemented.

Liran Berman, brother of hostages Ziv and Gali Berman, said that “with hope comes fear. Will the deal be signed? When will I see my brothers again? We are suspended between hope and dread. We have lived through Hamas’s lies before. We cannot let another deal collapse. Not again. President Trump, we stand with you. Do not stop. It is now or never.”

Former hostage Gadi Moses said, “I know the road is still long and riddled with obstacles, but today I can say that for the first time since my release from captivity, I have heard declarations that may give us some hope. This is the time to cease fire and focus on returning all the hostages and ending the war.”

Also Saturday, Netanyahu held meetings and discussions with the leaders of right-wing parties in his governing coalition, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, both of whom have called to annex and settle the Gaza Strip.

Ben-Gvir said that “we will be happy like everyone to see all the hostages returning to us,” but “if Hamas continues to exist after all the hostages are freed, Otzma Yehudit [Ben-Gvir’s party] will not be part of the government. We will not be part of a national defeat that will turn into a ticking time bomb until the next massacre.”

Smotrich did not threaten to leave the coalition, but he said that Netanyahu made a “severe mistake” by acquiescing to Trump’s call to stop the attack on Gaza City rather than holding “negotiations under fire.” 

“It’s a recipe for Hamas to waste time and wear down Israel’s stance,” he posted on X. 

Opposition leader Yair Lapid has said his party will vote to prop up the government if parties within the coalition attempt to bring it down to stop a hostage and ceasefire deal. 

On Saturday afternoon, Lapid said: “When Shabbat ends and you hear Smotrich and Ben-Gvir’s threats, remember they have nothing to threaten with. We won’t let them sabotage the deal. A clear majority of the Knesset and a clear majority of the nation support the Trump plan.”

Ceasefire and hostage-release talks have been ongoing in Doha, Qatar, for the last week. But one of the most consequential meetings in the negotiations could be happening tonight in Washington, when President Donald Trump hosts Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani for dinner at the White House.

This continues a new tradition for Trump of hosting prominent Gulf royals who aren’t the heads of state of their respective countries for dinner at the White House. In March, Trump hosted a dinner in the White House’s State Dining Room for Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the United Arab Emirates’ national security advisor and chairman of several sovereign wealth funds. 

Qatari officials have been in the U.S. all week. Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani was rumored to have met with Trump on the sidelines of the FIFA finals in New Jersey on Sunday, after being spotted in New York over the weekend. 

White House Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, whose trip to Doha last week was postponed over stalled talks, told reporters over the weekend that he planned to meet with Qatari negotiators on the sidelines of the match. And Trump shared a suite with senior Qatari sports officials at the match, including Nasser bin Ghanim Al-Khelaifi, the president of the Paris Saint-Germain team who played in New Jersey on Sunday and chairman of beIN Sports, previously known as Al Jazeera Sport. (In a weekend interview at the FIFA match, Trump even noted Qatar’s “big presence.”)

Qatar also loomed large in Washington this week, where legislators on the House Education and the Workforce Committee pressed university leaders from Georgetown, CUNY and the University of California, Berkeley about their foreign funding sources during a hearing about antisemitism in higher education. Former Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), one of Qatar’s top lobbyists in Washington, was seen sitting right behind Georgetown University interim President Robert Groves as Groves testified on Tuesday. The school has received over $1 billion from Qatar, and has a campus in Doha.

Qatar’s be-everywhere, invest-in-everything strategy has allowed Doha to gain footholds across the global economy and in diplomatic circles. And since the start of the war, it has sought to highlight its role as a facilitator of ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas, the latter of which Doha supports financially and diplomatically.

With Iran weakened following last month’s war, Qatar remains the Hamas sponsor with the most leverage on the terror group. Despite pledges last year to expel senior Hamas officials to Turkey, many of those officials remain in Qatar.

Earlier this week, Trump threatened steep tariffs on Russia if Moscow doesn’t reach a peace agreement with Ukraine before the end of August. But the Qatari royal family, with endless wealth and more favored global standing, does not face the same fiscal and geopolitical challenges and limitations as Russian President Vladimir Putin. It’s unclear what leverage Trump could use to push Qatar to exert pressure on Hamas as he seeks a resolution to the war.

Doha has the power to push Hamas to accept a ceasefire. Whether tonight’s dinner will exact a change in Qatar’s approach to Hamas remains to be seen. The sit-down between Trump and the Qatari prime minister could change the tide in the 21-month war, or it could serve as yet another missed opportunity in a war full of stalemates and diplomatic posturing — with fresh casualties mounting on both sides and 50 hostages still languishing in captivity.