The House voted by the narrowest possible margin to reject Democrats’ latest effort to force an end to the war in Iran, with a final tied vote of 212-212.

Reps. Tom Barrett (R-MI) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) both voted with Democrats and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) for the war powers resolution, while Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) again voted against it.

Following the vote, an angry shout about Golden could be heard from a lawmaker on the Democratic side of the chamber. Golden said in a statement on Wednesday that he would vote for a “‘clean’ war powers resolution to remove the United States from hostilities against Iran,” pointing to a potential upcoming vote next week on a resolution by Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), but said that the resolution that came up for a vote on Thursday was flawed.

Wednesday’s resolution, of which Golden was an original co-sponsor, set a 30-day timeline for the war operations in Iran, a deadline which has long since passed.

“I supported this resolution when it was introduced, but unfortunately its proposed 30-day deadline lacks any real meaning now that we are more than 70 days into this conflict,” Golden said. “It no longer passes the straight-face test. I look forward to voting for a clean, relevant resolution as soon as possible.”

But, Golden continued, the “law is clear” and the administration’s “window for unilateral military engagement has closed. Hostilities, including the use of the U.S. fleet to impose a blockade of Iranian ports, cannot legally continue unless the president seeks, and wins, Congressional approval.”

Barrett and Fitzpatrick both represent swing districts, and Barrett recently introduced an Authorization for Use of Military Force to limit the U.S. operations in Iran. Should Barrett and Fitzpatrick maintain their positions and attendance otherwise remain the same, a war powers resolution could pass as early as next week.

Barrett, when he introduced the AUMF, said that he believes operations in Iran are ongoing in spite of claims to the contrary by the administration and that Congress needs to reclaim its constitutional authority over war powers.

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), who voted for the first Democratic war powers resolution earlier this year and “present” on a second one in April, flipped his vote to “no” on this third effort. Davidson said he wanted to allow President Donald Trump space to negotiate and that any vote before the 90-day mark of the war would be “political.”

House progressives have gradually introduced a barrage of war powers resolutions, with the goal of potentially forcing votes as frequently as every day, meaning many more such votes are on the horizon.

The United Arab Emirates denied a report by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office on Wednesday that the Israeli leader secretly traveled to the UAE during the war with Iran to meet with Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed, which would have marked the first known meeting between the two leaders since the signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020.

The Prime Minister’s Office said that the meeting “resulted in a historic breakthrough in relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.” However, the UAE’s ministry of foreign affairs released a statement hours later calling the claims “entirely unfounded.” 

“The United Arab Emirates denies reports circulating regarding an alleged visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the UAE, or receiving any Israeli military delegation in the country,” the statement read. “The UAE reaffirms that its relations with Israel are public and conducted within the framework of the well-known and officially declared Abraham Accords, and are not based on non-transparent or unofficial arrangements.”

According to Ziv Agnon, who was Netanyahu’s chief of staff until early April, bin Zayed picked Netanyahu up in his own car and drove him to the palace.

During the conflict in Iran, Israel and the UAE have seen a marked increase in military and intelligence cooperation. Mossad chief David Barnea also quietly visited the UAE at least twice over the course of the war with Iran to directly coordinate regional security strategies, sources told The Wall Street Journal.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee confirmed this week that Jerusalem dispatched an Iron Dome missile-defense battery to the UAE along with Israeli military personnel to operate it in order to shield the Gulf nation from Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks. 

Two Israeli jets landed in the city of Al-Ain in Abu Dhabi in late March, according to flight radars, and headed back to Israel after an apparent four-hour visit. 

The Israeli and Emirati leaders also reportedly met in secret in 2018, two years prior to the signing of the Abraham Accords.

LOS ANGELES — The Israeli financiers, investors and entrepreneurs who attended last week’s Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills almost couldn’t make it. Just weeks earlier, after all, the country’s airspace had been largely closed as war raged with Iran. 

But aside from their slight fear that the fragile ceasefire would fall apart and leave them stranded in the United States, the Israelis who participated in the marquee conference of global finance brought an upbeat attitude about Israel’s economy, even two-and-a-half years into near-constant war that began with Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks. 

“When the war began, I think none of us — none of the regulators in Israel, and almost none of the players or the investors in Israel — thought or believed that after two-and-a-half years of war, Israel would show such growth, such resilience,” Seffy Zinger, chair of the Israel Securities Authority, told Jewish Insider in an interview. (The ISA is Israel’s equivalent of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.) 

Zinger was at Milken to spread the message that global financiers should consider investing in the Israeli economy, and in particular the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, despite the doom-and-gloom headlines about the Middle East. 

“I’m not an investment advisor, but you can see that if you were not in Israel in the past two years, you probably missed out, if Israel was not part of your portfolio. So I think Israel is becoming a very interesting place economically,” he said. 

The shift away from Israel in American politics did not appear to be reflected at this gathering of global business elites: Natti Ginor, a managing director at Jefferies and the bank’s head of Israel investment banking, pitched Israel at the conference as a financial capital in the Middle East. Blackstone’s Tel Aviv-based senior managing director, Yifat Oron, was also there talking about her work leading the firm’s investments in Israel.

“When we are talking to investors and the big players, what I see is a lot of interest in Israel, and I think the economy and the numbers speak for themselves,” said Zinger.

Dror Barak traveled to Los Angeles from Israel to meet developers and investors from across the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the Palestinian territories. He is the founder of Align Capital, an infrastructure-focused private equity firm that is working on projects related to IMEC, the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor — a planned project meant to further economic cooperation across wide swathes of the world. Its development has stalled since the Oct. 7 terror attacks and the ensuing war, but behind the scenes, progress is being made. 

“The war, I don’t like to say it, but with all the bad things it also pushed us toward a new era of cooperation,” Barak told JI last week. “The war made us on the same side. It’s the first time in history that we, the UAE [and] Saudi are on the same side. We are all against, publicly or less publicly, Iran. With the United States, of course. So this is a very, very, very dramatic thing, and it’s changed dramatically the nature of our relationship.” IMEC has been floated as an alternative for global shipping amid turbulence in the Strait of Hormuz.

Barak acknowledges that Israel’s reputation has suffered: “Yes, it’s an issue,” he said. But he argued that the work of investing in cross-regional infrastructure must happen, even if the geopolitical situation remains unresolved.

“I’m not waiting for the American public to dedicate my direction, and I’m not waiting for [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] or [President Donald Trump] to do some peace,” said Barak. “We promote Arabs and Jews working together. So everywhere that you are looking, I think that we are doing the right thing — the right thing for Israel, the right thing for the region and the right thing for the global politics that want to support the right forces.”

Last year was a banner one for Israeli startups, and the country’s GDP rebounded last year after slowing in 2023 and 2024. But challenges remain. Bentzion Levinson, founder and CEO of Heven AeroTech, an American company with a large Israeli workforce, said there were times that more than one-third of his employees were out of the office doing reserve duty in the Israeli military. 

“To this day, we have an average of 10 to 20% of our employees in reserves, around the clock. So I think it’s a challenge. But challenges build strength,” Levinson told JI in Los Angeles. His company’s creation of pioneering long-range stealth drones has driven contracts with the U.S. military and earned a unicorn valuation. 

“A lot of things are taking a toll on families [and the] personal, but I think people are strong and they realize that there’s no other choice,” said Levinson. “I think it’s gonna be a decade of significant growth in Israel, especially in the defense tech world … it’s a challenge, but I think the Israeli people can overcome it.”

Zinger, the ISA chair, was attending Milken with his chief of staff, who spent nearly 400 days serving in the reserves after Oct. 7. Responsibilities got juggled; some days the staffer would work three days and do reserve duty for two days. There was no choice but to adapt. And that flexibility, Zinger argued, is part of why Israel’s economy has performed better than anyone expected during the war. 

“I think this is part of the strength of the Israeli community and society, exactly these kinds of things, and of course, without that strength, the performance that we see could not have happened,” said Zinger. “It’s something that I think we learn how to live with.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a CBS “60 Minutes” interview on Sunday that the war against Iran is not yet over, in spite of the weekslong ceasefire and assertions by the U.S. administration that the operations that began in February have concluded.

In the interview with Major Garrett, Netanyahu also reiterated his call to end direct U.S. financial aid for Israel over the next 10 years.

Netanyahu said that, while the joint U.S. and Israeli operations in Iran accomplished much, the war is “not over,” with nuclear material still in Iran, and certain Iranian enrichment sites, proxies and ballistic missile efforts surviving.

“We’ve degraded a lot of it. But all that is still there, and there’s work to be done,” he said, adding that any diplomatic agreement with Iran should address all of those areas. Netanyahu said that he would be happy to see an agreement, if it covers those areas, but that both Israel and the United States are prepared to re-engage militarily if it does not.

The Islamic Republic regime, he added, is at its “weakest point” but “it’s not over.” Asked whether there is anyone on the Iranian side capable of negotiating a durable deal, Netanyahu declined to disclose his views publicly, but said he had shared his opinion with Trump.

Netanyahu denied reports that he had assured Trump prior to the beginning of the war that the Iranian regime would fall.

“[We] both agreed that there was both uncertainty and risk involved,” Netanyahu said. “And I remember … I said, and he said that there’s danger in action, in taking action. But there’s greater danger in not taking action.”

Addressing a question about the physical condition and influence of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who was reportedly seriously wounded at the beginning of the war and has made no public appearances since, Netanyahu said, “I think he is alive.” 

“What his condition is, it’s hard to say,” Netanyahu said. “You know, he’s holed up in some bunker or in some secret place and he’s, I think he’s trying to exert his authority. I don’t think he has the same authority that his father had … that’s also creating the disruptions in the regime.”

Asked whether the U.S. and Israel had underestimated the likelihood that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz, he said that they came to understand the issue over the course of the war. But he argued that Tehran’s decision to close the Strait has proven costly for Iran, in light of the U.S.-imposed blockade.

He also declared that Iran would have had a nuclear weapon now, or within two months, if Israel and the U.S. had not carried out their operations in 2025 and 2026.

“The most pointed success is knocking out 20 top nuclear scientists who were working on the atomic bombs to be used against Israel, America and anyone else,” Netanyahu said.

🇮🇷WATCH: Iran might already have a nuclear bomb, had Israel not launched its two military operations, Israeli PM Netanyahu said on his "60 Minutes" CBS interview.

Read more here: https://t.co/ABBvkCPGHp pic.twitter.com/chDlNiYKeB

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 11, 2026

“I think taking out that amount of know-how — it doesn’t eliminate the know-how but it sets them back,” he continued. “Does it mean that they can’t produce a device? No. But it means that if they planned this arsenal of nuclear atomic bombs that they thought they’d have by now — that’s gone, that’s been pushed back, and it’s important they don’t have an atomic arsenal. But they would have had it and we would have faced certain death. So the greatest accomplishment is we’re alive.”

Netanyahu recounted conversations in 2016 and 2024 with Trump in which Trump expressed concern about Iran’s nuclear program. Asked why the U.S. had not acted militarily until 2025, Netanyahu said that Trump had been hopeful that sanctions imposed in his first administration would stop Iran’s nuclear program, but they did not fully do so.

Netanyahu reiterated his call to draw down and ultimately end direct U.S. financial support for Israel over the next decade — despite tensions that his stance has caused with supporters of Israel on both sides of the aisle. He also said he wants to begin drawing down financial support now, rather than waiting for the next Congress, adding that “it could go down very fast.”

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu: "I want to draw down the American support to Israel to zero."

In a "60 Minutes" CBS interview, Netanyahu reiterated his call to end direct U.S. financial aid for Israel over the next 10 years.

Read more here: https://t.co/4AXZP3RyUc pic.twitter.com/3NI5nWNW47

— Jewish Insider (@jewishinsider) May 11, 2026

He said that the future of the relationship should be focused on joint projects equally funded by both Israel and the United States, from which the two countries would share equally. Such a system is how missile defense funding is currently provided, among other projects, but that funding has also come under attack by some in the U.S.

Netanyahu blamed social media, and the manipulation of American social media users by hostile foreign actors using bot farms, for cratering support for Israel among the American people.

“While they’re attacking us with the equivalent of F-35, we’re trying to fight them with a Polish cavalry,” Netanyahu said. “So I think we have to engage on that front, not by censorship but by finding ways that are applicable to democracies. … We have a problem. I recognize it. And we have to get our act together.”

Asked about Gaza, Netanyahu said that Hamas still must be disarmed, demilitarized and deradicalized, and that he has asked the U.S. to provide names of countries that are willing to send in their own troops to carry out that effort, given that Hamas has reneged on its ceasefire obligations. He suggested that Israel may ultimately need to carry out that mission itself.

“If it comes down to us, then we’ll have to do it, but we’ll choose the time and the circumstances in which to do it because we’ve got a few other things,” he said. “But we are not going to let Hamas ever threaten Israel again.”

The Israeli prime minister said that Israel had destroyed more than 90% of Hezbollah’s missile and rocket stockpile, but that the group still maintains thousands of such weapons. He said that an invasion of Lebanon was necessary to prevent a repeat of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas incursions into Israel from Israel’s north.

Asked about Russian and Chinese support for Iran during the current war, Netanyahu largely dodged the question. He argued that an emboldened Iran is not in China’s best interests, and said that Russian military support to Iran has “not been a big issue” — while declining to comment on intelligence support, which Moscow has reportedly provided Tehran in the form of targeting data for missile and drone attacks throughout the region.

Jewish Insider’s Israel editor Tamara Zieve contributed to this report.

A majority of Israelis believe that ending the war with Iran under the current conditions would undermine the country’s security, according to a new poll from the Israel Democracy Institute.

The survey, conducted between April 26-30, over two weeks into the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, found that 64% of Jewish Israelis said ending the war in its current state is “only slightly or not at all aligned” with Israel’s security interests. Nearly half of Arab Israelis (48.5%) said the same.

Despite ongoing U.S.-Iran negotiations and a fragile ceasefire, most Israelis expect a return to further escalation. Overall, 62% of respondents said they believed a return to widescale conflict was likely, including roughly two-thirds of Jewish respondents (64%) and 52% of Arab respondents. Since the survey was conducted, the ceasefire has grown more precarious, with both sides alleging violations.

In the first week after Israel and the U.S. launched joint strikes on Iran’s top officials, 80% of Israelis — including 93% of Jewish Israelis — said they supported the war against Iran.

The latest survey also points to shifting perceptions of U.S. influence over Israeli decisionmaking. A majority of Jewish Israelis now believe the Trump administration exerts greater influence over Israel’s defense policy than the Israeli government itself, with that share rising from 45% in October 2025 to 56.5% in the newest survey. Over the same period, the percentage of Jewish Israelis who see their own government as the primary decisionmaker in its military actions dropped from 24% to 15%.

Among Arab Israelis, views moved in the opposite direction: The share who believe the U.S. holds greater influence fell from 39.5% to 25.5%.

Meanwhile, the survey revealed pessimistic attitudes as they relate to U.S.-brokered talks between Israel and Lebanon, including the ongoing ceasefire. Nearly 80% of Jewish Israelis believe there is a fairly low to very low likelihood of reaching a “stable diplomatic defense arrangement with the Lebanese government, that will include the disarming of Hezbollah.” Among Arab Israelis, 45% believe the likelihood of a deal between Beirut and Jerusalem is fairly high to very high.  

The poll also pointed to deepening concern among Israelis from across the political spectrum over the recent decline in positive attitudes toward Israel in the U.S., with a majority of respondents — 72% — calling the decline “somewhat or very worrying for Israel.” The survey reported no difference in this issue among Jews and Arabs. 

The poll surveyed a representative sample of Israeli adults, including 601 Jewish respondents and 150 Arab respondents.

As Vice President JD Vance has recently found himself navigating tenuous negotiations between the United States and Iran, his central role in the talks to end the war is highlighting his own vulnerabilities on the domestic front — where he is facing pushback from the isolationist right that is seen as part of his coalition. 

In many ways, Vance’s political troubles recall his predecessor, former Vice President Kamala Harris, who in her 2024 presidential campaign drew fierce protests from far-left activists who objected to former President Joe Biden’s support for Israel amid the war in Gaza.

Harris, who has grown more openly critical of Israel since losing the race and leaving office, strained both to articulate a consistent message on Gaza that would satisfy the far and center left and to distance her campaign from an aging, unpopular president whose approach to Israel, according to her recent memoir, was not fully aligned with her own.

Anti-Israel activists continue to insist, even years after the election, that Harris’ association with Biden while he supported Israel’s war against Hamas cost her votes that contributed to her defeat, while pro-Israel Democrats claim she failed to draw red lines around growing extremism within the party that alienated moderates, and is now inflecting the midterm elections. More recently, the former vice president faced anti-Israel hecklers during a book tour last year.        

In recent weeks, Vance, who is widely seen as a top 2028 presidential prospect, has likewise struggled to appease a restive coalition of anti-war critics on the populist right who feel his alignment with President Donald Trump’s robust foreign policy agenda represents not only a betrayal of their values but also the noninterventionist views he himself had long espoused.

Last week, in a disruption reminiscent of Harris’ campaign experience, Vance was notably heckled during a speaking appearance at a Turning Point USA event held at the University of Georgia, where an attendee interrupted his comments to accuse the Trump administration of supporting “genocide” in Gaza and “killing children.”

“If you want to complain about what happened in Gaza, why don’t you complain about Joe Biden and the last administration? We’re the administration that solved that problem,” Vance said in response to the heckler, after defending what he called Trump’s “peace agreement in Gaza.”

He also touted his so far unsuccessful efforts to broker a resolution to the Iran war — about which he reportedly voiced resistance behind the scenes before Trump greenlit the campaign in late February — saying he is pursuing the president’s goal to achieve an ambiguously outlined “grand bargain” on nuclear enrichment.

“The United States had never had meetings at that level with the Iranian government in 49 years,” Vance said at the event, days after returning from talks with Iran in Islamabad where he tried and failed to reach a diplomatic agreement.

The vice president was expected on Tuesday to leave for resumed negotiations in the Pakistani capital as a two-week ceasefire was set to soon expire, but his trip was put on hold and the ceasefire extended, raising questions about the prospect of a swift settlement.

While Vance had sought to keep the war at arm’s length in the initial days after the attack on Iran, his high-profile position in the negotiation process has now forced him to identify more closely with the sort of foreign military conflict he had built his political career on opposing. 

As a junior senator from Ohio, Vance even wrote in a January 2023 opinion piece that he was supporting Trump’s reelection campaign because the president “started no wars” in his first four years in the White House.

With Trump’s approval ratings trending downward — and as Republicans fret that the war in Iran as well as rising gasoline prices could undercut their chances of holding the House and Senate in the midterms — much is riding on Vance’s efforts to put an end to the conflict as he lays the groundwork for a potential White House bid.

While polling has shown that Trump’s war aims continue to garner widespread backing within his party, including the MAGA wing, independent voters who were a key part of his winning coalition in 2024 are divided, as are younger voters whom Vance has targeted.

In Georgia last week, Vance seemed to acknowledge disappointment among audience members over the war. “I recognize that young voters do not love the policy we have in the Middle East, OK,” he said. “I understand.”

“I’m not saying you have to agree with me on every issue,” he said at the Turning Point event. “What I am saying is: Don’t get disengaged because you disagree with the administration on one topic. Get more involved, make your voice heard even more. That is how we ultimately take the country back.”

Ahead of 2028, Vance is no doubt hoping that his involvement in the Iran negotiations will help yield a deal that satisfies the president and that he can wave before the far-right base he has continued to indulge, even as it has grown increasingly hostile to Jews and Israel.

Meanwhile, Vance has at the same time made some overtures to pro-Israel Republican donors skeptical of his close relationship with Tucker Carlson, a vocal detractor of Israel whose commentary regularly veers into antisemitic rhetoric that the vice president has ignored or downplayed.

But as Harris’ problems demonstrated two years ago, Vance may ultimately find it is not possible to have it both ways.

For the fifth time, the Senate rejected an effort by Democrats to force the administration to end the war in Iran, with the partisan battle lines on the issue remaining firmly unchanged from previous iterations of the vote.

“Democrats will continue to force votes on war powers resolutions every week until Republicans decide to put the American people over Donald Trump and end this war,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said ahead of the vote. 

The vote failed 51-46, with Sens. Mark Warner (D-VA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and David McCormick (R-PA) not voting, and Sens. John Fetterman (D-PA) and Rand Paul (R-KY) voting with the opposing party.

Democrats have already introduced eight other similar resolutions that will be eligible for votes in the coming days and weeks, giving them plenty of runway to continue such efforts for the foreseeable future.

In the House, Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA) also introduced new war powers resolutions on Iran, after previous efforts narrowly failed. The Congressional Progressive Caucus reportedly plans to force votes on such resolutions frequently next month.

Though they haven’t broken openly with the president, dynamics for at least some Senate Republicans could begin to shift toward the end of the month; under the War Powers Act, the administration can only carry on military operations without congressional approval for 60 days, with an additional 30-day drawdown period.

Though some Republicans have said Congress and the administration should disregard that deadline, others say that some form of action will be necessary at that point, and some hope that the war will be over before then.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) who has been working with other senators on crafting an Authorization for Use of Military Force on the war, told Jewish Insider on Wednesday, “we’ve been having some good conversations, and we’re going to continue them.” She said the goal of the AUMF is to have “greater disclosure, greater transparency” about the war.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) said earlier this week, ahead of the U.S. extension of the ceasefire, that he believed the president was “trending in a direction of ‘let’s end this without further involvement, including even further strikes’” and said that he hopes the war is over before the 60-day mark.

He told JI that he hasn’t been working with Murkowski on her AUMF, but said that the effort “makes sense since we’re approaching the 60-day deadline.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told JI he would “give the administration the benefit of the doubt that they will respond accordingly, in compliance with that” 60-day deadline “and if not, then we’ll have to have some discussions” around further congressional involvement through an AUMF or other avenue.

Still, other Republicans seem comfortable overlooking the 60-day deadline.

“I think the president has the authority to protect us, so we should let the president protect us,” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) said.

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

IRON DOME DECISIONS

J Street accelerates leftward shift as progressives move to end Iron Dome funding

J Street’s Ilan Goldenberg said the surge in far-left calls to cut off missile-defense aid ‘stirred up the conversation a little more’ but says the group was moving that way regardless

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

CAMPAIGN CLASH

Sue Altman accuses challenger in N.J. race of ‘cheerleading’ the ‘deaths of Israeli children’

Adam Hamawy said on Hasan Piker’s show that he does not support Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system, arguing that it insulates Israel from the consequences of war

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

LATIN LINKS

Milei, Netanyahu launch ‘Isaac Accords’ to encourage Israel, Latin America engagement

An Israeli diplomatic source told JI that Ecuador and Paraguay are expected to join the Isaac Accords

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

MICHIGAN MOMENT

Michigan Dems nominate lawyer who praised Hezbollah for UMich regent over Jewish incumbent

Platner, in Reddit post on Hamas terrorist attack: ‘From a strictly professional standpoint, this was a damn fine looking and successful raid against a superior opponent’

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

CAPITAL CONTEST

D.C. mayoral candidate Kenyan McDuffie courts Jewish voters as DSA-endorsed rival Lewis George faces communal backlash

‘I didn’t seek, nor would I accept, the endorsement of Democratic Socialists of America,’ McDuffie told JI in an interview

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

SCOOP

‘I dig it’: Graham Platner praised Hamas tactics in 2014 graphic video of killings of Israeli soldiers

Platner, in Reddit post on Hamas terrorist attack: ‘From a strictly professional standpoint, this was a damn fine looking and successful raid against a superior opponent’

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

SCOOP

Zohran Mamdani’s video chief lauded Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar

The Oct. 7 mastermind died in ‘heroic’ style, according to Donald Borenstein, director of video for the Mamdani campaign and City Hall

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

DEM DIVIDES

Inside the DNC working group at the center of Democrats’ Israel fight

The question facing the Middle East working group’s members is whether they will actually be able to agree on anything — or if the group is simply a way to push the issue off until 2028

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

An effort by Senate Democrats to force an end to the war in Iran was again blocked by Republicans on Wednesday, the fourth such failed attempt mounted by Senate Democrats since the war began in late February.

The measure failed by a vote of 52-47, with all Democrats except Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) voting for a procedural motion on the war powers resolution, and all Republicans except Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) voting against it. Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV) was not present for the vote.

Nevertheless, Democrats intend to continue their efforts. They have nine such resolutions that have been filed, and top Senate Democrats said this week they intend to continue forcing such votes weekly, in the hopes that more Republicans will change their votes as the war drags on.

Some Republicans have begun to express hesitation about the war, and top members of the caucus have said they hope it comes to an end soon. But thus far most have not been willing to openly break with President Donald Trump on the effort.

Separately, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) plans to call up a vote later on Wednesday on a pair of measures to block sales of bombs and bulldozers to Israel, which Sanders has also framed as referenda on the war in Iran. Twenty-seven Democrats have previously voted for such resolutions, and supporters of the effort expect that number to increase this time.

But at least one lawmaker, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who introduced a war powers resolution on Iran this week, for future consideration, said that she views the two issues differently.

“I think of them very differently,” Gillibrand told Jewish Insider during a virtual press conference on Wednesday. “I oppose the war in Iran, but I do not believe we should leave an ally who is being attacked without support,” she said, referring to Israel.

Like a desperate poker player holding an ace in the hole, Iran has a “strategic reserve” if the ceasefire in the war with Israel and the U.S. collapses and fighting resumes: the Houthis, the Tehran-backed Yemeni terrorist group.

How Iran plays the Houthi card has been the subject of concern in Israel, with analysts telling Jewish Insider that everything from a ground invasion from the east — with echoes of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, rampage in southern Israel — to making good on the threat to block the Bab el-Mandeb Strait to further choke off international shipping remains in play.

Yoni Ben-Menachem, a senior Middle East analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, told JI that the Houthis planned “to take revenge and bring back their honor” since Israel killed much of their leadership in August 2025.

“They see that Israel’s air defenses are strong, and it’s hard for them to reach military achievements with missiles and drones. They want to surprise Israel, so they are looking at ways to do it on the ground,” he said.

One scenario that Israel has actively prepared for, even before this year’s war with Iran, is a Houthi ground invasion via Syria and Jordan.

The IDF said in September that it has intelligence indicating that the Houthis initiated a training course named “Al Aqsa Flood,” as Hamas called the Oct. 7 attacks. The group planned to take advantage of the instability in Syria and political weaknesses in Jordan to invade Israel from the east, deploying tens of thousands of terrorists on a killing spree, heading toward Jerusalem. In January, the IDF’s Central Command led a training exercise, together with Israeli Border Patrol and police, on how to counter such a scenario. 

In addition, the IDF has continued the construction of a security fence along the border with Jordan.

Yossi Mansharof, a lecturer at Haifa University, told JI that the Houthis speak openly about a possible land invasion in their media channels: “They say they intend to invade and … reach Dimona [in southern Israel], conquer [Israeli] towns.” 

Mansharof said that while an invasion via the Red Sea and Eilat, at Israel’s southern tip, would be closer to the Houthis’ home base, such a move is “unrealistic; they would have to go undetected by the IDF.”

However, he said, the 186-mile border between Israel and Jordan is particularly porous, and if Hamas could break through the Gaza fence, as it did on Oct. 7, the Houthis may be able to do the same in Jordan. In addition, Iran has long worked to gain a foothold in Jordan.

“Iran is a shared enemy” of Israel and Jordan, Mansharof said. “Iran violates Jordanian sovereignty, and some of the missiles shot at Israel land in their territory. … Iran wants to establish terrorist infrastructure [in Jordan], and King Abdullah has said in Davos and in media interviews that he is concerned about Iran.”

In addition, Mansharof said, the Shi’a militias in Iraq, which shares a border with Jordan, have close ties with the Houthis.

A Houthi attack could also be part of an Iran-led multi-front assault on Israel, which Iranian officials — including a top advisor to Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker and leader of negotiations with the U.S. — have spoken about for years, Mansharof said.

“They want to advance a mutli-front attack on Israel from all of the axis of resistance arenas,” Mansharof said. “They want to end the story, not just have more rounds of fighting [with Israel]. … A Houthi invasion can be part of that.” 

Ben-Menachem argued that a more realistic scenario in the near term is that the Houthis would help the Iranians by blockading Bab el-Mandab, a strait passing from the Gulf of Aden to the Red Sea, to cut off global shipping at a second point while the Strait of Hormuz, which is under Iranian control, remains closed. Saudi Arabia is reportedly especially concerned about this possibility, as the Gulf state uses the waterway to move much of its oil.

The Iranians have been saving the Houthis as their “strategic reserve” in case of renewed fighting with the U.S., Ben-Menachem said, and should the Yemeni terrorists join the war, “their target will be first the U.S. and then Israel.”

“The Iranians see that the most effective move is to pressure the U.S. and harm the world economy,” he said. 

Still, Mansharof said, Israel “should not wait for the Houthis to take initiative. Israel needs to choose the timing [for military action], because at some point, the war with the Houthis will resume. … Israel needs to build advanced intelligence capabilities and cooperate with the Americans to create a jumping-off point. … It’s a just war of defense for Israel.” 

Jerusalem’s recognition of Somaliland in December could provide Israel with a physical base for such an attack and would “break the supply chain of Iranian aid to the Houthis” from Somalia, which is just across the Gulf of Aden from Yemen, Mansharof noted.

Ben-Menachem said Israel’s announcement last year that it had discovered the Houthis’ plan served to undermine it.

“Israel must repeatedly warn them and say they know what they’re planning. We shouldn’t take it off the agenda, talking about it is part of the deterrence … [The Houthis’] success depends on the element of surprise. If we show that they can’t surprise us, it will lower their motivation,” he said. 

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

MINNESOTA MATTERS

Angie Craig calls on Minnesota Democrats to investigate antisemitism ahead of state party convention

Delegates are expected to take up divisive anti-Israel resolutions at the convention being held next month

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

HUNGARY FOR MORE

Analysts expect continued pro-Israel slant from new Hungarian government under Magyar

Economic ties and broader European alliances are likely to preserve the bilateral relationship, even as the expected prime minister-elect moves to rejoin the ICC and potentially pivot back towards the EU

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

THE VIEW FROM ISRAEL

Israelis uncertain if Iran war made them safer after ceasefire brings combat to an inconclusive halt

After the ceasefire went into effect, there was a pervading feeling in Israel that the war with Iran was not complete, and the return to routine life may be short-lived

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

COMFORT FOOD

From trauma to table: An Israeli duo uses food therapy and song to foster connection

A traveling program called ‘Soul and Roll’ by singer Hananel Edri and Foodish CEO Merav Oren tells the Jewish story through an immersive culinary and musical experience

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro accused President Donald Trump of being “bullied” into starting a war with Iran, suggesting in an interview with the “All-In Podcast” that Israel had pressured the U.S. into joining a military campaign against the Islamic Republic. 

“America should never be led around by any other nation. It should always be about America’s interests, our national security interests, the interests of expanding freedom and opportunity for the American people,” said Shapiro, who was responding to a question from tech investor Jason Calacanis about whether the U.S. followed Israel into an unnecessary war. “We should never, ever be bullied, as maybe President Trump was, by any other world leader.”

In the interview, Shapiro continued a line of criticism that he has used regularly against Trump’s handling of the war in Iran: that the president doesn’t know what he’s doing and has failed to offer a sufficient explanation to the American public.

“This was a war of choice. The president never defined the objectives. It is clear he doesn’t know how the hell to get out of this,” Shapiro said.

Shapiro’s allegation that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had led the U.S. into war with Iran was a rhetorical escalation for the pro-Israel Democrat. While he reasserted the same pro-Israel, anti-Netanyahu argument that he has been making for years now, Shapiro also made clear that it is America’s goals — and not Israel’s — that he cares about.

“I don’t view this issue as a Jewish American,” Shapiro said. “I view this issue as an American, and I view this issue in a way of trying to understand what is the best thing for America, which to me is having peace and stability in the Middle East.”

Even as Shapiro went after Trump for his handling of the war, he offered a word of praise about a different Republican, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), and his approach to antisemitism within his own party.

“I think on the issue of antisemitism, we have got to be in a place where we universally condemn it. And I think what you’re seeing from some folks on the right and some folks on the left is they’ll only call it out if it’s said by a political opponent or someone they disagree with,” said Shapiro. “I frankly respect people on the right like Ted Cruz, who have pulled it out within the Republican Party. I’ve tried to call it out when it rears its ugly head in my party.”

The “All-In Podcast” is hosted by four Silicon Valley investors, including David Sacks, co-chair of Trump’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. 

For many Israelis who were awoken by rocket sirens just before 3 a.m. Wednesday, only to see the headline on their phones that a two-week ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran had been reached, the news was met with mixed feelings of relief and concern.

For most Israelis, the ceasefire has brought tangible relief: an end to regular missile alerts, the prospect of uninterrupted sleep (though Hezbollah swiftly shattered that hope for many on Thursday night), and children back in school. Yet for residents of Israel’s north who continue to live under frequent Hezbollah rocket fire, even this fragile respite remains out of reach.

After the ceasefire went into effect, there was a pervading feeling in Israel that the war with Iran was not complete, and the return to routine life may be short-lived. An overwhelming majority of Israelis supported the war a month after its late-February start, and just over half supported its continuation, according to the Israel Democracy Institute. Those views remained relatively steady after Iran stopped shooting missiles: A poll broadcast on Israel’s Channel 13 news on Thursday found that 51% of Israelis opposed President Donald Trump’s agreement to a ceasefire. 

Israelis’ support for the war effort despite the challenges on the home front was strong because its aims — eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat and severely degrading the ballistic missile threat — were meant to ultimately make them safer, along with the hope, bolstered by statements from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Donald Trump, that the mullahs’ regime would be toppled.

Yet, according to the Channel 13 poll, Israelis ranked their sense of security after the war at 5.36 out of 10, and gave Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a grade of 5.56. Only slightly more Israelis (33%) thought that Israel and the U.S. won the war, as opposed to Iran (28%); a plurality (39%) were not sure.

“Israel did not meet its war aims, and the cost is expected to be high,” Yoav Limor, the main military analyst of Adelson-owned Israel Hayom wrote on Thursday. The Times of Israel’s Lazar Berman lamented that “another war ends without a decisive win.” Even the pro-Netanyahu Channel 14 featured the headline “This is how wars are lost: Stopping a moment before victory” on its homepage, and another, more positive, article about the war’s achievements, still admitted “‘total victory’ was not reached.”

Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid went as far on Wednesday as to call the ceasefire “a diplomatic disaster at a level that I cannot remember. … Of all possible results, Netanyahu reached the worst.” 

Shas leader Aryeh Deri, a Security Cabinet observer and one of Netanyahu’s closest political allies, accused Lapid and others who made similar comments of “acting against the country for narrow, short-term political gain.” 

On Wednesday evening, Netanyahu made a live statement to reassure the public. 

“Iran is weaker than ever, and Israel is stronger than ever,” the prime minister said. “This is the bottom line … We have set the terrorist regime in Iran back many years. We have shaken its foundations. We have crushed it.”

However, Netanyahu added, “We still have goals to complete, and we will achieve them either by agreement or by the resumption of fighting. We are ready to return to combat at any necessary moment. … This is not the end of the campaign; this is a way station on the way to achieving all of our goals.” 

The mixed feelings from the public and the mixed messages from Netanyahu were backed up by experts who spoke to Jewish Insider on Thursday.

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Amir Avivi, chairman of the Israel Defense and Security Forum, told JI that “it’s too early to sum up, because we need to see the results of the negotiations over the next two weeks, and what happens in Iran when the dust settles.” 

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Assaf Orion, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, said that it is “too early to say” whether Israel is safer now than it was six weeks ago.

“We are at halftime,” Orion said. “The first part was military … but wars are not just a military competition, they are diplomatic and military. …The reality after exhausting the negotiations is how we will judge the war.” 

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Amir Avivi, chairman of the Israel Defense and Security Forum, told JI that “it’s too early to sum up, because we need to see the results of the negotiations over the next two weeks, and what happens in Iran when the dust settles.” 

That being said, Avivi was confident that Israel is safer than before the war began.

“The last six weeks were a huge drama, a total military defeat of a regional power,” he said. “Iran’s military industry, steel plants, petrochemical plants, navy, were almost entirely eliminated. … Essentially, Israel and the U.S. did whatever they wanted for the past month and a half. They attacked wherever they wanted. If they wanted to turn off the country’s electricity, they could have. … [Iran is] crushed militarily and economically.” 

Avivi did not view Israel as having been stopped by the U.S. mid-fight, citing the IDF as saying that they hit all the targets they had defined as important and reached a stage where the remaining targets were energy and economic sites. “That’s why the Iranians broke and wanted a ceasefire,” Avivi said.

“The nuclear project was harmed, but the enriched uranium is still in Iran, and it is unclear if they are closer to giving it up than before,” Brig.-Gen. (res.) Assaf Orion, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, said. “That needs either a military solution or a deal, or the situation will get worse. … [Iran] may change its nuclear strategy for the worse, because with fewer capabilities, they are more motivated [to break out to nuclear weapons], and the knowledge and materials remain.” 

This was the right time for a ceasefire, Avivi posited, because the fighting had gotten to a point where the remaining targets were Iran’s economic abilities, and the Islamic Republic “basically surrendered,” and decided to agree to the U.S. demand to reopen the Strait of Hormuz without concessions from the U.S.

Orion, however, said that “Israel did very serious damage to Iran [which will last] for many years,” but still viewed the results of that damage as inconclusive.

“The nuclear project was harmed, but the enriched uranium is still in Iran, and it is unclear if they are closer to giving it up than before,” he said. “That needs either a military solution or a deal, or the situation will get worse. … [Iran] may change its nuclear strategy for the worse, because with fewer capabilities, they are more motivated [to break out to nuclear weapons], and the knowledge and materials remain.” 

As for Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, Orion said, “their industry is damaged and unable to produce large quantities … [but] they still retain about half of their capabilities, something like 1,200 missiles and over 200 launchers. It’s clear they can still create the terror effect and harass Israel and neighboring countries. … They can buy [drones] from Russia to threaten the Gulf states.” 

A central question pertaining to Iran’s ballistic missiles and other conventional capabilities, Orion said, is what it will rebuild, how quickly and whether China will help Tehran.

Avivi said he views Iran’s ballistic missile strategy as “totally ineffective, influencing nothing … sporadic and not targeted,” and noted that it did not damage Israeli military capabilities, while “every Israeli strike is a death blow to the regime, its industries or senior officials.” 

As for regime change, which was not an official war aim, Orion argued that it’s too early to know whether it will happen. “Trump said it already happened, but it’s really just a shift change. The [remaining] people are no less extreme,” he said.

Avivi said that reaching a ceasefire with the regime does not undermine the effort to change it: “The people can still take to the streets, and Israeli and American drones can back them up. This regime will crumble in the end, but it’s a process. It won’t happen in a day.”

One major downside of the war for Israel may be a deterioration in U.S. public opinion towards the Jewish state.

“On the one hand,” Orion said, “Israel proved itself as a military partner with capabilities and prowess to significantly help the U.S. with what it wanted to achieve. Israel was there from day one and took on most of the mission of clearing out Iran’s air defenses … It did a lot of the work when NATO didn’t want to.”

However, Orion pointed to a recent New York Times article that portrayed Israel as “dragging the U.S. into the war, even though it was a presidential decision in the end, contrary to the stances of senior [American] figures and public opinion on the left and right. It will take time to see the aftershocks.”

As to whether the ceasefire will last, Orion said that, while nothing is certain, a ceasefire is generally called when both sides “estimate that conditions would be improved by talking,” and noted that at the outset of the war, the Trump administration said it would likely take four to six weeks.

Avivi said that “Israel and the U.S. now have two weeks to regroup and rearm, which Iran isn’t able to do because it doesn’t have a military industry anymore.” 

Iran can spend the ceasefire “taking stock of the disaster that happened to them,” Avivi added.

Top Democrats across both chambers condemned President Donald Trump for threatening that “a whole civilization will die tonight” in Iran, with some pushing for Trump’s immediate removal from office over the threat and his conduct of the war.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and other members of Democratic leadership including Reps. Katherine Clark (D-MA), Pete Aguilar (D-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Joe Neguse (D-CO) and Suzan DelBene (D-WA), issued a statement calling Trump “unhinged” and saying that he risks bringing the country “into World War III” unless Congress reconvenes to vote to bring the war to an end.

“For years, Republicans have enabled and excused Donald Trump’s deeply dangerous and extreme behavior. Enough is enough,” the leaders said. “Our brave men and women in uniform have been put into harm’s way in the Middle East. Over a dozen have already been killed and hundreds injured. Gas prices are skyrocketing, the cost of living in America is out of control and billions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted on a reckless war of choice.”

In another joint statement, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Jack Reed (D-RI) and Brian Schatz (D-HI), who are the top Democrats on several relevant committees and subcommittees, similarly condemned Trump’s comments, saying they indicate an intent to commit war crimes.

“This is not strength. Intentionally destroying the power, water, or basic infrastructure upon which tens of millions of civilians depend to punish the very civilians who suffer at the hands of the Iranian regime would constitute a war crime, a betrayal of the values this nation was founded on, and a moral failure,” the lawmakers said. “It’s unconscionable to threaten the lives of so many people — grandparents, children, families — simply because they were born in Iran.”

They said that Trump’s comment “makes Americans less safe, further destabilizes our nation and economy, and puts at greater risk U.S. service members,” as well as makes a diplomatic solution — ”the only viable solution to this war” — harder to achieve.

In a separate statement, Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also said that Trump’s threat constitutes a war crime and an illegal action under international law which risks tens of millions of Iranian civilians, and potentially catastrophic after-effects.

“At this critical moment, the United States must pursue immediate de-escalation and a coordinated diplomatic strategy with our allies. We cannot allow Iran to simply reset to a dangerous status quo — but the answer is not to threaten war crimes and isolate us from every partner we need to end this conflict,” Meeks said. Trump’s threat is “recklessness that America and the region will pay for long after this president is gone,” he added.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), who prior to the war was one of the few Democrats who said he would oppose a war powers resolution — though he ultimately voted for it after the war began — demanded that the House immediately reconvene for a war powers vote. Moskowitz’s comments are a sign that Trump’s latest comments have crossed a line even for some of the most hawkish Democrats in the House.

“Speaker Johnson must immediately reconvene the House to vote on a war powers resolution. It’s beyond clear we are at war,” Moskowitz said. “The Speaker’s legacy will be that he made Congress so irrelevant that a president can threaten to wipe out a civilization while Congress is on vacation.”

Jeffries said Democrats plan to bring up another war powers resolution to halt the conflict in Iran, which stands a stronger chance of passing than a previous one, when the House returns from its recess. At least some of the Democrats who voted against the previous resolution are expected to support this one, and a small number of additional Republicans may join them.

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), one of four House Democrats who voted against the previous war powers resolution on the war in Iran last month, announced he will now support such an effort because the administration has failed to provide adequate answers about its goals and its exit strategy.

“[W]e must be careful with the language we use. Strength and destruction are not the same,” Cuellar added. “When the United States echoes the rhetoric of its adversaries, we risk weakening the values that have long defined our leadership.”

Several Democrats have described Trump’s comments as a threat to commit genocide.

Trump’s threat has also prompted growing calls from at least 70 House Democrats for his removal from office, either through impeachment or the invocation of the 25th Amendment, which allows the involuntary removal of a president from power if he is mentally or physically unfit to govern.

Sens. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) joined those calls.

“Donald Trump is deranged,” Wyden said. “He must be impeached and removed from office. Republicans who don’t stop him will have blood on their hands, and anyone who carries out an order to bomb civilian targets will be complicit in war crimes and will be held accountable.”

Markey called the president “unstable and a clear and present danger, not just to the American people but to the world” and said he “must be removed from office before he causes incalculable and unfathomable harm.” He said that a war powers resolution to stop the war is now insufficient to address the situation.

A small number of Republicans are also airing concerns with Trump’s threat.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), one of the few Republicans who has been openly skeptical of the war effort in Iran, said that Trump’s threat “cannot be excused away as an attempt to gain leverage in negotiations with Iran.”

“This type of rhetoric is an affront to the ideals our nation has sought to uphold and promote around the world for nearly 250 years. It undermines our long-standing role as a global beacon of freedom and directly endangers Americans both abroad and at home,” Murkowski said, calling for deescalation by both Trump and Iran, and insisting that the U.S. must draw a distinction between the Iranian regime and the Iranian people.

Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) said that, while he has supported the war thus far, “I do not support the destruction of a ‘whole civilization.’ That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America.”

“[W]hat sets America apart is not only our strength, but how we use it. Our nation has always conducted military operations for just causes and through just and moral means. This must continue in the future; otherwise we forfeit our legitimacy to lead the world,” Moran said. “[H]ow we protect the lives of the innocent is just as important as how we engage the enemy.”

Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-CA), who recently left the Republican Party but remains part of the GOP caucus and has generally been hawkish on Iran, said that the U.S. “does not destroy civilizations. Nor do we threaten to do so as some sort of negotiating tactic.”

“Congress has a responsibility to conduct oversight with respect to ongoing military operations and our obligations under both U.S. law and international agreements to which we are a signatory,” Kiley said.

President Donald Trump doubled down on his threats to escalate the war in Iran on Monday if Iranian leaders do not agree to a broad ceasefire deal that includes reopening the Strait of Hormuz by his Tuesday evening deadline, threatening that the U.S. would target every bridge and power plant still standing in the country.

Trump took a hawkish posture while speaking to reporters at the White House alongside senior U.S. defense officials about the ongoing war and diplomatic efforts to bring it to a close, warning that the U.S. has a plan to take out Iran’s entire transportation and energy infrastructure within “four hours” if Iran did not make a deal. 

“I can tell you they’re negotiating, we think, in good faith. We’re going to find out. … After [8 p.m. ET on Tuesday], they’re going to have no bridges. They’re going to have no power plants. Stone ages,” Trump said, referring to the deadline he set for Iran to agree to his terms, which has now been postponed three times.

The president said he extended the deadline from Monday to Tuesday at 8 p.m. ET because he “thought it was inappropriate” to demand a response “the day after Easter.” The comment came hours after telling reporters at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll that the Tuesday deadline was final and unlikely to have any additional extensions. 

“The entire country can be taken out in one night and that night might be tomorrow night,” Trump said from the briefing room. “We have a plan, because of the power of our military, [where] every bridge in Iran will be decimated by 12 o’clock tomorrow night, where every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding and never to be used again. I mean complete demolition by 12 o’clock, and it’ll happen over a period of four hours if we want it to.” 

“We don’t want that to happen. We may even get involved with helping them rebuild their nation. If that’s the case, the last thing we want to do is start with power plants, which are among the most expensive things, and bridges,” he continued. “So do I want to do that? No. Do I want to destroy their infrastructure? No. It will take them 100 years to rebuild. Right now, if we left today, it would take them 20 years to rebuild their country and it would never be as good as it was. The only way they’re going to be able to rebuild their country is to utilize the genius of the United States of America.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who took part in the press conference alongside Trump, told reporters on Monday that, “per the president’s direction, today will be the largest volume which strikes since day one of this operation. Tomorrow, even more than today, and then Iran has a choice. Choose wisely, because this president does not play around.”

Trump repeatedly reiterated his commitment to ensuring that Iran can never obtain a nuclear weapon — after saying the country’s nuclear program was “obliterated” last June — and said that any agreement between Iran and the U.S. would need to adhere to his terms, including the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. “We have to have a deal that’s acceptable to me, and part of that deal is going to be [that] we want free traffic of oil and everything,” the president said.

“They’re not going to have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said of Iran, arguing that his actions were an insurance policy for the U.S. “if somebody that takes my place someday is weak and ineffective, which possibly that will happen, because we had numerous presidents that were weak, ineffective and afraid of Iran.”

The president described the Iranians as “very good bulls*** artists, that’s why for 47 years they’ve been bulls***ing other presidents,” while defending his decision to take military action against the regime.

“I think that 47 years of this stuff is long enough. They’re at the weakest point they’ve ever been,” Trump said, despite Iran’s continued missile strikes across the Gulf and in Israel. “In fact, the biggest problem we have in our negotiations is that they can’t communicate. … They have no method of communication. So we’re communicating like they used to communicate 2,000 years ago with children bringing a note back and forth.”

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

ALTERED LIVES

They survived the Temple Israel attack. They can’t escape what followed

The foiled attack at the Michigan synagogue is being called a miracle — but those who were inside now face the lasting impact of trauma and a search for safety

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

O CANADA

As antisemitic attacks mount, Canadian Jews ask whether they still belong

After a series of targeted attacks in Toronto and beyond, Jewish leaders are raising the alarms on Canada’s failure to properly protect its Jews amid ‘systemic’ antisemitism

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

As the U.S. and Israeli war with Iran extends into its sixth week, the next 36 hours may be some of the most pivotal, offering clarity as to whether an end is in sight — or whether an escalation is imminent.

On the table now, according to Axios, is a proposed two-phased ceasefire deal, lasting 45 days, that would immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz and give negotiators two to three weeks to reach a broader agreement to end the war. As a signal that the U.S. is open to the agreement, President Donald Trump extended by 24 hours the deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait, setting a new deadline of Tuesday night ET.

The core issues remain: Tehran’s closure of the key waterway, and the fate of the country’s enriched uranium. But a deal between Washington and Tehran would include broader issues, including potential sanctions relief in exchange for Tehran’s promise that it will not pursue nuclear weapons. Iran has signaled that it will not reopen the Strait for a temporary ceasefire and is seeking a more permanent resolution.

The president paired threats with optimism, leaning into the current debate with a mix of tough talk — warning yesterday that strikes targeting Iran’s power plants and bridges would take place on Tuesday in the absence of a deal — and hopes of an 11th-hour diplomatic breakthrough. 

Trump doubled down on both sentiments yesterday in a flurry of interviews with reporters. “If they don’t make a deal, and fast, I am considering blowing everything up and taking over the oil,” Trump told Fox News’ Trey Yingst on Sunday morning. Yet the president said there was a “good chance” that a deal would be reached today — even as he posted “Tuesday, 8:00 P.M. Eastern Time!” on his Truth Social site, a reminder of the new deadline he had set for the Islamic Republic to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In comments to The Wall Street Journal, the president said that if the Iranians “don’t come through, if they want to keep it closed, they’re going to lose every power plant and every other plant they have in the whole country.”

Trump made the comments on the heels of the daring weekend rescue of an American weapons system operator who had been shot down inside Iran — the details of which the president is expected to share at an afternoon press conference today alongside senior military officials. 

A diplomatic agreement would see a winding down of the war that would likely allow Iran to retain some of its ballistic missile capabilities — a compromise that is unlikely to sit well in Israel, which continues to face fire from Iranian forces. 

On the other hand, Trump’s threatened destruction of key Iranian infrastructure could further deteriorate conditions in the Islamic Republic, where a regime-imposed internet blackout has ensured minimal on-the-ground reporting on weeks of war. And as always, the president has one eye on the markets, which will open today after the holiday weekend.

The U.S. and Israel have already made serious strategic strides by killing dozens of members of Iran’s senior leadership and severely crippling Tehran’s nuclear program. The question now is whether that will be enough for Trump to declare victory in accordance with the rough timeline he’s given for U.S. operations in Iran — or whether the U.S. will double down on its military operations.

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

COMMUNITY TIGHTROPE

In Michigan Senate primary, McMorrow balances Jewish fears and Arab outreach after attack

In an interview with JI, the state senator described herself as someone who supports the U.S.-Israel relationship, but not unconditionally

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

DECISION TIME

Trump at a crossroads on Iran: Will he or won’t he send in troops?

As the president touts progress in talks with Tehran while escalating military pressure, analysts say the administration is keeping its options open — but will need to make a move soon

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

The Trump administration’s conflicting posturing on the war in Iran — insisting on the one hand that a diplomatic deal is within reach while also threatening to escalate strikes and potentially deploy ground troops — has left experts and former administration officials uncertain about President Donald Trump’s next move.

The president threatened in a post on his Truth Social platform on Monday morning to “conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their electric generating plants, oil wells and Kharg Island” if current talks fall apart and “the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business.’”

But he wrote in the same post that the U.S. is engaging in “serious discussions” with Iran’s current leadership, which he described as a “new” and “more reasonable” regime than its predecessor, and said that “great progress has been made.”

Reached for comment, the White House referred Jewish Insider to Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s remarks at Monday’s briefing where she defended the president’s approach and repeatedly stated that Trump and his advisors are merely ensuring he has “maximum optionality” as he considers next steps.

“With respect to forces that are on the ground in the Middle East, it’s the job of the Pentagon to create maximum optionality for the commander-in-chief. It does not mean the president has made any additional decisions,” Leavitt said, adding that Trump has “decline[d] to rule … out” the use of ground troops.  

On Capitol Hill, there are increasingly evident divides among Republican lawmakers about the prospect of boots on the ground. Some have argued that a ground operation would require explicit congressional authorization, and a number of otherwise-hawkish Republicans are hesitant about, if not outright opposed to, the idea of a ground operation.

In recent days, the U.S. has amassed over 3,500 more troops in the Middle East, including deploying the USS Tripoli aircraft carrier, which hosts around 2,500 Marines. Trump has also threatened to attack Iran’s oil and energy facilities and potentially escalate the war as a result of Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz — a vital passageway for the global oil trade. 

Elliott Abrams, who served as Iran envoy under the first Trump administration and is now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told JI that the president’s decision to move more troops to the region and not exclude ground operations from future military plans is an effort to “keep his options open.”

“The massing of ground forces near Iran is both preparation for their possible use and a means of pressuring Iran to make concessions in the negotiations,” Abrams said. “There is no way of knowing what Trump will do if the negotiations fail.”

The administration is considering multiple options for the use of ground troops, including the seizure of Kharg Island, a vital economic artery for Tehran that accounts for roughly 90 percent of the country’s crude exports. 

Cameron McMillan, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that targets could also include the “seizure of key terrain — including relevant islands — in and around the Strait of Hormuz and securing Iranian highly enriched uranium.” However, he remained unsure whether the Trump administration would carry out such operations. 

“Seizing or destroying the [highly enriched uranium] is a sensible goal if it is militarily feasible without too much risk,” Abrams said. “Taking the targets associated with the strait is, I think, both for bargaining purposes and perhaps meant to be given up only when traffic has moved through the strait freely for some time.”

Jonathan Ruhe, a fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, said that there are “real reasons to think ground operations could end up taking place.” He said that Iran “refuses to entertain Trump’s demands,” which could compel the administration to use elevated means of force in order to seize Iran’s highly enriched uranium, reopen the Strait of Hormuz or take Kharg Island “or other assets as bargaining chips.”

“The past month reaffirms that standoff air and naval power are insufficient by themselves to neutralize these targets or convince Iran to give them up,” Ruhe said. “Trump’s tendency is to employ the forces that he deploys overseas, as seen in both the Venezuela operation and the start of the current conflict. And there’s an opportunity cost to letting such well-trained U.S. forces idle indefinitely in the Middle East after pulling them from the Indo-Pacific or the homeland.”

Daniel Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Barack Obama and deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East under President Joe Biden, said current talks between Washington and Tehran “look like a negotiation going nowhere.” He argued that Trump’s track record of pivoting to military action when diplomacy stalls, along with pressure to decide whether to use forces that cannot remain in the region indefinitely, suggest that ground operations could be looming.

“There is little chance that Iran, despite all punishment it has taken from U.S. and Israeli airstrikes, will make these concessions … If the [current] negotiations falter, it’s not hard to guess which way [Trump] will go,” Shapiro said. 

Shapiro said that the current moment has a “similar feel to the military build-up Trump ordered throughout February” before he launched the war at the end of the month. Shapiro cautioned that any use of ground forces would indicate a “longer war” and signal that the objectives of the war are expanding “far beyond what negotiations in February were seeking to achieve.”

“With the ground forces available, they can’t just park in the region for long. Trump will, sooner than later, need to decide whether to use them or send them home,” Shapiro added. 

Meanwhile, McMillan cautioned against ground operations, “especially those designed to secure and hold terrain.”

“I do not see any value in employing these forces to seize Iranian territory and would highly caution against ground operations,” McMillan said. “All of the desired objectives — with the exception of securing highly enriched uranium — can be secured through other means with substantially less risk. Seizing tankers is the most obvious if [the administration] is seeking to cut off Iran’s oil revenue.” 

He also warned that the current forces being deployed might “not be enough for any large-scale ground operations for any long duration.” 

“Simply deploying these units is unlikely to leverage Iran at the negotiating table, as the regime is fighting a total war that it views as existential,” McMillan continued. “Considering the profound impacts of U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval capabilities, as well as its senior leadership, it is unlikely that a few more American battalions in the region will change that view or their will to continue fighting.”

Ruhe noted that Trump could be overlooking the potential costs of ground operations. He said that the president “has not adequately anticipated Iran’s retaliation” and is “discounting the uncertainties and risks of rolling the iron dice with ground operations.”

“And even if Trump is clear-eyed about the risks, he may accept them because getting the highly enriched uranium [HEU] and reopening the strait are such important goals,” he continued. Ruhe noted that such operations would likely be very complex. 

“Seizing Iran’s HEU at Isfahan, Kharg Island or beachheads along the strait would be larger and more open-ended than raids on Maduro, al-Baghdadi or Bin Laden, which were in-and-out and occurred in much more tactically permissive environments,” Ruhe said. “Though Iran is being hit hard, it still has much greater military capabilities than ISIS, Venezuela or the Taliban.”

McMillan said that ground operations could also provide Tehran with leverage and risk further expanding the conflict. He also noted that any ground operation designed to seize and hold terrain in Iran is “more likely to become a liability than an asset and would draw the Trump administration closer to the war of attrition that it is trying to avoid.”

“Instead of the U.S. securing leverage, Iran would likely gain significant leverage against the U.S. by being able to employ a greater part of its arsenal against a vulnerable and isolated U.S. troop presence,” McMillan said. “If those troops were to take consistent casualties against threats that could not be removed from the air alone, expanded ground operations in the name of force protection would not be hard to imagine. That would require more forces, more resources and, in turn, likely more casualties.” 

However, Richard Goldberg, a former Trump administration official, said that the use of ground operations does not necessarily signal that there will be an expanded presence and scope of U.S. involvement. 

“People hear ‘boots on the ground’ and immediately think of Iraq, but we had boots on the ground in Venezuela as well — just in a very different way,” Goldberg said. “The U.S. would not be invading Iran in the sense of Iraq, but you could see a number of contingencies that might require special forces, airborne or marines for narrowly scoped missions with limited objectives, whether that’s securing nuclear material or neutralizing a threat that you can’t neutralize from the air for a variety of reasons.”

“It’s also important to remember that the military is preparing for contingencies, which may or may not ever be needed,” Goldberg added, noting that the U.S. “had Marines off of Venezuela but we didn’t use them.”

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

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

SEAT SHAKE-UP

Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick’s scandal could send another Israel critic to Congress

The lawmaker, who may soon be expelled from the chamber, is already in a heated primary race with Elijah Manley, a young far-left candidate endorsed by TrackAIPAC

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

PHONE A FRIEND

Family of China-allied tech mogul embedded in Zohran Mamdani’s movement

The sister, niece and brother-in-law of Maoist magnate Neville ‘Roy’ Singham have gained influence in New York’s ascendant socialist movement

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

Jewish Israelis’ support for the war against Iran dropped by 15 points from the first week of the war, according to a poll released by the Israel Democracy Institute on Monday.

In the first week of the war, 93% of Jewish Israelis supported continuing the war, while in the latest IDI poll — conducted nearly a month into the war — 78% support it. More than twice as many Israeli Jews (11.5%) oppose the war as did at the beginning of March (4%).

As at the start of the war, only a minority of Arab Israelis are in favor of it, with their support dropping from 26% to 19%.

Most Israelis said Iran was more resilient than anticipated, with 56% of Jewish Israelis and 51% of Arab Israelis answering in the affirmative.

Most Jewish Israelis (62%) said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched Operation Roaring Lion against Iran for strategic and security-related reasons, while most Arab Israelis (55%) said he was motivated by personal and political considerations.

Over a third (35%) of Jewish Israelis said that the war against Iran would be sustainable in Israeli society for a month, while 28% said Israelis can bear it as long as needed to meet the operation’s goals. Among Arab Israelis, 33% said Israelis could endure the war for a month, while only 5% said the Israeli public can sustain it as long as needed.

At the same time, there was a rise in hope among Israelis: When respondents were asked for their outlooks in four areas, optimism about social cohesion was up eight percentage points from last month, reaching 30%; optimism about the economy rose to 34% from 31%; and optimism and the future of democracy reached 44%, up from 39%. Optimism about national security stayed about the same at 47%.

The vast majority of Arab Israelis reported that their mental health (85%) and financial situation (89%) had deteriorated, a slight increase from the last time IDI asked the poll question in November. Among Jewish Israelis, 43% reported a deterioration in their mental state and 36% in their financial situation, almost identical to the November 2025 findings.

The poll was conducted among a sample of 756 Israeli adults from March 22-26, with a 3.56% margin of error. 

Days after launching the war against Iran last month, Israel and the U.S. began signaling that they were quickly degrading the Iranian ballistic missile threat. Two weeks into the war, the White House posted on X that “Iran’s entire ballistic missile capacity [was] functionally destroyed.” 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a press conference last week that “Iran’s missile and drone arsenal is being massively degraded and will be destroyed.” The IDF has repeatedly sent updates over the past month about having destroyed the majority of Iran’s ballistic missiles and launchers. 

So why are missile barrages and rushing to the bomb shelters still a part of most Israelis’ daily  lives?

Sirens sounded 10 times in Israel’s center on Thursday. In the last week, about 1,000 alerts were sent out to different parts of Israel due to Iranian missiles. Israelis from Eilat to the Golan have spent many hours in shelters since the war began. Two fatalities were reported in recent days, but nearly 300 people have been injured since the beginning of this week, according to the spokesperson for Magen David Adom emergency services.

Jonathan Schanzer, executive director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Jewish Insider that “this is a war, and wars have tides that come in and out … [they] require a certain amount of adjustment and patience. You’re not going to get everything you want in a linear fashion.”

The IDF declined to comment on the unusual number of Iranian missiles penetrating Israel this week – in contrast with the war overall, during which only about 40% of the missiles crossed into Israeli skies, according to the INSS, generally resulting in fewer sirens each day. 

Schanzer pointed to the weather as one explanation: Clouds, rain and fog in Iran make it difficult for Israeli Air Force drones, which remain in Iran’s skies at all times, to detect and destroy missile launchers before they shoot. 

But even if the skies were sunny, “the number of missiles [left in Iran] is likely below 1,000 and could be down to 500; it’s an inexact science,” Schanzer said. “The missile capability is obviously still there and has been throughout, and that doesn’t change. … They still have the ability to fire.”

There’s a term in Hebrew, which translates to “armaments economy,” that explains another aspect of what is happening. The IDF, Schanzer said, is “probably thinking about … how many missile interceptors do you burn when you know there are another two or three weeks left of Iran’s capability to launch, and there’s also [the war in Lebanon]. There is a calculus and there is an uncomfortable one.” 

A new report from the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) found that 90% of the roughly 4,200 missiles and drones fired by Iran at targets across the region were intercepted, but American, Israeli and Gulf states’ air defenses have been degraded by Iran’s targeting of radar and communication links. “The war has become a stockpile race,” JINSA stated. “U.S. and Israeli offensive fire must exhaust Iran’s missiles and drones before … interceptor stocks run too low.”

Yaakov Katz, a military expert and author of While Israel Slept: How Hamas Surprised the Most Powerful Military in the Middle East, argued to JI that missile launcher destruction is the wrong way of looking at the war, meant to “create a narrative of accomplishment,” when there is still much work to be done.

Ultimately, Katz argued, people don’t care about the number of missiles that were destroyed when they’re “in the bomb shelter five, six times a day. … They’re getting hammered. It’s not a way to measure anything.”

“The IDF knows when they blow up a launcher … They know what they destroyed,” Katz said. “But the number remaining constantly changes, which proves it is BS. … In week one [the IDF] said there were 150 launchers left. In week two they said 150 left. A few days ago, they said 150 again.”

Katz pointed out that the IDF likely does not know how many missiles and launchers Iran has underground. “There is satellite footage showing [the IDF] destroyed entrances to the underground ‘missile cities,’ but they don’t know how long it takes to excavate [new entrances] or what damage there is inside.”

While Katz said that he doesn’t “diminish from the value of taking a threat, degrading it and having more time to live in a place of security,” he does not view that as a victory, because the threat will return. He pointed to how rapidly Iran was able to produce new ballistic missiles after last year’s 12-day war: “They’re going to rebuild everything.” 

“Just saying they destroyed 70-80% of missile launchers … If that’s your measure of success, you’re basically confirming there will be another war in the future,” he added.

“This war has three potential victories,” Katz said, listing regime change, removing Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and, lastly, reaching “a deal that provides for any or all of those, plus restrictions on the development and range of ballistic missiles.”

Katz also noted that the United Arab Emirates is relaying a similar message — that degrading Iranian missiles is not enough. He cited a recent Fox News appearance by Lana Nusseibeh, the UAE’s minister of state at the foreign ministry, and an op-ed by Yousef Al Otaiba, the UAE ambassador to the U.S., who wrote in The Wall Street Journal, “We need a conclusive outcome that addresses Iran’s full range of threats: nuclear capabilities, missiles, drones, terror proxies and blockades of international sea lanes.”

Schanzer agreed that the number of missiles and launchers destroyed is “a tactical measure … you’re attacking the arrow and not the archer.” However, he added: “You can criticize it all you want, but if that’s all you’ve got, then you’re doing all you can.”

“The bigger goal is regime change, but there’s no handbook for that either,” he said. “I still think America and Israel have the advantage. There is zero air defense in Iran, the leadership is absolutely decimated, the arsenal is smaller than it was, and the regime is under enormous strain. That is the most important measure to look at right now. It doesn’t mean there aren’t challenges [such as] the Strait of Hormuz and missile attacks.” 

As the conflict between the United States, Israel and Iran nears the one-month mark, experts say the war has diverted diplomatic and military attention away from Gaza, creating a mixed picture: Hamas has used the pause in sustained Israeli military pressure to reassert control in areas it still governs, while the degradation of Iran’s capabilities could ultimately leave the group weaker and more isolated once the conflict subsides.

“I think it’s safe to say that Israeli and American attention has been significantly diverted to the Iran war, and as a corollary to the second front, meaning the war with Hezbollah, at the expense of full time attention to Hamas,” said Matthew Levitt, director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s program on counterterrorism and intelligence. “But it’s not like nothing’s happened in the interim, both for good and for bad.”

Some ceasefire efforts remain ongoing, even as the war continues: Earlier this week, Nickolay Mladenov, the Board of Peace’s high representative for Gaza and a former senior United Nations official, briefed the U.N. Security Council on the board’s progress in implementing elements of President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan, outlining early reconstruction efforts and a phased proposal for disarmament. 

According to experts familiar with the briefing, those efforts have focused in part on areas of Gaza under Israeli control, where work has begun on clearing debris, addressing unexploded ordnance and laying the groundwork for new housing and infrastructure projects.

Gaza currently remains divided among the Hamas-controlled western part of the enclave, referred to by some experts as the “red zone,” while the IDF controls the eastern side, or “yellow zone.” Levitt said that work is being done to “build what is being described as new Rafah, as well as an Emirati-funded city, so that hopefully in the not too distant future, Gazans who are in the area of the enclave controlled by Hamas can be vetted and moved into these new communities.” 

The National Committee for the Administration of Gaza — a new technocratic Palestinian governing body launched under the peace plan — has also begun vetting thousands of candidates for a new civilian police force, while several countries, including Indonesia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo and Albania, have committed troops to a proposed International Stabilization Force, according to the UN. 

However, experts and former White House officials also noted that the diverted attention from Gaza has had negative effects as well, most notably creating conditions for Hamas to “reassert its very physical presence” in the part of the enclave it controls. 

Elliott Abrams, Iran envoy under the first Trump Administration and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the U.S., Israel and Arab states focusing elsewhere “is temporarily an advantage for Hamas. For Gaza, the issue is whether the [Board of Peace] member states, led by the U.S., will insist on Hamas disarmament — without which all the plans for rebuilding Gaza will fail, and no country will send its troops there as a peace force.”

Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute, also noted that “Hamas has certainly been taking advantage of the shift of attention to the Iran war.”

“Last week, [Mladenov] presented Hamas with a proposal for disarmament. The proposal calls for gradual disarmament but makes it emphatically clear that Hamas needs to fully disarm by the end of the process,” he said. 

“Because of lack of international attention, the tools needed to implement this — namely the creation of a new Palestinian police force — have been stalled,” al-Omari continued. “Hamas itself is unlikely to respond to the disarmament proposal until it sees how the Iran war ends. If Iran is not decisively weakened by the end of the war, Hamas will likely adopt a more hardline position when it comes to disarmament.”

Levitt said that while Hamas’ retrenchment in the enclave may cause concern, “the reality is [Hamas is] not able to expand beyond the less than half [of the enclave] that it controls.” He also noted that the current conflict in Iran may actually create the conditions to further weaken, pressure and isolate the terrorist group when the war subsides. 

“[Hamas is] not getting the money they once did on a regular basis from Iran or from Qatar,” Levitt said. “It has limited resources, and when the war ends I think that authorities will still have a lot of the same leverage that they did before the war, and in a situation where perhaps Iran’s capabilities to fund and arm its proxies are sufficiently degraded.”

He also noted that there could be more “interest” from other countries in aiding in the Gaza peace process once the Iran war dies down. 

“Sure, there’ll be parties who are angry at the United States, who are angry at Israel, and feel this was a war of choice,” Levitt said. “But once the war ends, I think there will be a lot of people who are going to be eager to try and do what they can to try and stabilize the region after these years of severe instability and suffering, and I think there’s going to be a focus on Gaza once the war ends.” 

Daniel Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel under President Joe Biden, agreed that the war may weaken Iran’s ability to support Hamas and that “some regional players might be newly committed to seizing the opportunity to disarm this branch of the Iranian axis of resistance.” 

But the assistance of Gulf countries is not guaranteed, he said. “Others may pause their involvement in post-war Gaza for various reasons, ranging from the need to focus on their own recovery from the war, to unhappiness with Israel’s role in starting a war they hoped to avoid, to continuing opposition to Israel’s policies in the West Bank and opposition to a credible pathway to a Palestinian state,” Shapiro said. 

Rachel Brandenburg, a senior policy analyst at Israel Policy Forum, also argued that the war in Iran could impact “regional stakeholders’” involvement in post-war Gaza, “particularly across the Gulf.” She noted that “when the dust settles on this war, it is also likely to detract from the funds and attention Gulf countries had pledged for Gaza and to support the Palestinian Authority.”

“[Gulf countries] will not only have to confront the losses from physical infrastructure destruction but also from a pause on investments, business, tourism, and energy resources,” Brandenburg said. “I expect they will reconsider how much money is left for Gaza and the Palestinian Authority.”

Meanwhile, Jason Greenblatt, former White House envoy to the Middle East under the first Trump administration, argued that the “focus has not shifted” from combating Hamas and has instead “sharpened.” 

“Dismantling the Iranian regime’s capacity to arm, fund and direct Hamas is critical for Gaza’s future,” Greenblatt said. “But in my view, there is a difference between temporary humanitarian relief and meaningful rebuilding. The first can and should continue. The second cannot move forward until Hamas disarms and stops threatening Israel.”

Alexander Gray, former chief of staff to the National Security Council during Trump’s first term and now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, echoed those sentiments, telling Jewish Insider that the Trump administration is “smartly treating many of the Middle East’s challenges as inherently interconnected.”

“There will never be peace in Gaza without destroying the ability of Iran to fund and deploy proxies like Hamas to destabilize the region,” Gray said. “The president’s focus on dismantlement of the Iranian proxy network is not accidental: without it, peace from Gaza to Lebanon to Syria to Iraq to Yemen will be elusive.”

Thursday brought a series of new signals that at least a small number of ideologically varied Republican lawmakers are growing frustrated with the war in Iran and with the administration’s frequently shifting rhetoric about it — including from some otherwise-hawkish lawmakers.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who previously called for an end to the war, told Bloomberg on Thursday that she’s working on a potential authorization for use of military force in Iran, to limit the scope of the U.S. operation and prevent the deployment of ground troops.

“I don’t know what else to do,” Murkowski told the outlet. “I’m worried we get out of town and the president goes in with ground troops aiming for a full takeover.” The Senate is scheduled to be in recess for the next two weeks.

After Murkowski’s comments, The Wall Street Journal reported that President Donald Trump was considering deploying an additional 10,000 troops to the Middle East.

Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE), who has generally been supportive of the war effort, told NOTUS on Thursday after a House Armed Services Committee briefing the day prior that he was unclear on the U.S.’ plans and goals in the war.

“I don’t know the plan,” Bacon said. “What is the end-state goal? What is the mission? I think clarity there would be helpful.”

Rep. Rob Wittmann (R-VA) also told the outlet that he’s seeking “more granularity, more specificity on what specifically is happening on the ground, and then how is that leading to achieving the military objectives.”

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), the Armed Services Committee chairman, emerged from the briefing Wednesday frustrated with what he said was a lack of information from the administration, warning officials that their reticence could have “consequences.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who’s been more critical of the war in general, indicated to Axios she’s now inclined to vote for an upcoming war powers resolution to end the war, bringing it closer to the threshold for passage. She added, “War with Iran needs to end. President Trump has won the war, time to exit.”

House Democrats were initially expected to call a vote on that legislation this week, but have delayed their plans until after the congressional recess, saying they still don’t think they have the votes to pass it.

Regardless of whether the resolution passes the House, it remains unlikely to pass the Senate and could be vetoed by Trump. But passage of the resolution in the closely divided House would be a rebuke of Trump and his strategy.

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

TROUBLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Gulf states slam Arab League countries for tepid response to Iranian aggression

Frustrated UAE leaders are questioning the ‘impotence’ of countries like Egypt — and warn that silence on Iranian aggression will push the Gulf closer to U.S., Israel

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

MICHIGAN MOMENT

Elissa Slotkin, Haley Stevens criticize El-Sayed over rallies with Hasan Piker

Stevens said that by associating with Piker, El-Sayed is ‘choosing to campaign with someone who has a history of antisemitic rhetoric’

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday afternoon that he would extend his pause on plans to strike Iran’s energy infrastructure, “per Iranian government request,” for an additional 10 days amid ongoing diplomatic negotiations to end the war.

Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform that he is “pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time.” 

“Talks are ongoing and, despite erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media, and others, they are going very well,” Trump added.

The post comes a few hours after the president said that he wasn’t sure if he would follow through with his five-day delay, set to expire Friday, for strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure, which he had pushed back at the start of diplomatic negotiations on Monday. 

“I don’t know yet,” Trump said when asked by reporters if the strikes would still take place Friday. “It’s a day. In Trump time, a day, you know what it is? That’s an eternity.”

Trump made the comments while speaking to reporters at the opening of his first Cabinet meeting since launching the war in Iran.

He alleged that Iranian leaders “are begging to make a deal” to end the war while criticizing press reports alleging that he was looking for a diplomatic off-ramp to the conflict, saying he has not decided whether he’ll agree to a diplomatic settlement if one were reached.

“They are begging to make a deal. Not me,” Trump said of current Iranian leadership. “They’re not fools, they’re very smart actually in a certain way and they’re great negotiators. I say they’re lousy fighters, but they are great negotiators. They are begging to work out a deal. I don’t know if we will be able to do that. I don’t know if we’re willing to do that. They should’ve done that four weeks ago. They should’ve done it two years ago.”

“The reason they want to make a deal is they have been just beat to sh*t,” he said later on, touting the U.S. military operation as a success. 

During the meeting, White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff confirmed reports that the U.S. had presented Iran with a “15-point action list” as a starting offer in peace talks between the two countries. He also confirmed that Pakistan had been acting as a mediator for the U.S. and Iran.

“We will see where things lead, and if we can convince Iran that this is the ​inflection point ​with ⁠no good alternatives for them other than more death ​and destruction,” Witkoff said. “We ​have ⁠strong signs that this is a possibility.”

Witkoff said to Trump, “You’ve instructed us that your preference is always peace and that we should make that our priority. We have delivered that message, sir, along with the 15 points for peace. Finally, we have told Iran one last thing: don’t miscalculate again.”

Trump later revealed that the “present” Iran gifted the U.S. was allowing eight oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, which he said proved the U.S. was speaking with the “right people” in Iran with the authority to make such decisions. 

“They said to show you the fact that we’re real, and solid and we’re there, we’re going to let you have eight boats of oil, eight boats, eight big boats of oil,” Trump said of the Iranians. “And I said, ‘Well, I guess they were right,’ and they were and they were real.”

Trump then said that Iran later allowed two additional vessels to travel through the strait, which he described as an overture from the Iranians to “apologize for something they said.”

Turning to Witkoff, the president then expressed hope that he hadn’t “screwed up” their diplomatic efforts by revealing the “gift.”

Several Senate Republicans this week declined to fully endorse President Donald Trump’s comments that the U.S. had “won” the war in Iran, arguing that there is still more to be done to fully degrade Iran’s capabilities to the extent necessary.

Trump told reporters in the Oval Office Tuesday, “You know, I don’t like to say this — this war has been won. The only one that likes to keep it going is the fake news. … We’ve won this war.” Trump also said Monday he would postpone strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure to allow for “productive conversations” toward ending the war — an announcement that boosted markets and brought down oil prices.

“I think we’re not done. I don’t like calling it ‘won’ until it’s done,” Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told Jewish Insider. “You can’t stop a war too soon, once it gets started, because then you’ve got to get right back to it again. You’ve got to finish it.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he agreed with the president, but added, “we’ve done a good job of accomplishing our military objectives. We’re not quite there yet.”

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) said, “I think what he means by that — and he happens to be correct — we have basically significantly reduced their ability to wage a lot of the … war. It doesn’t mean they’re not dangerous yet, but we’re getting there.”

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, quipped of Trump’s comments, “I think that’s probably hyperbole. It’d be the first time ever, but I think it may be hyperbole.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) hewed more closely to the president’s comments, while stopping short of declaring the war over. “Operation Epic Fury is almost done. I mean, I think the mission that was very clearly defined in the beginning, the objectives have been met,” Johnson told reporters on Wednesday.

Graham, one of the most vocal supporters of the war on Capitol Hill, who has been agitating for the U.S. to pursue full regime change in Iran, said that he would support — and even prefer — a diplomatic outcome.

“Not only do I support @POTUS and his team’s efforts to negotiate with Iran to find a solution to the threats this regime presents to the region and the world, I encourage it,” Graham said on X on Wednesday. “It is the outcome I seek, not the method. I have confidence in President Trump’s negotiating team to make sure that any deal would meet the military objectives laid out early on.”

Those goals, as articulated by Graham, are ending Iran’s ballistic missile program, support for terrorism and nuclear ambitions.

“If diplomacy can achieve these objectives, I would not only support it, but I would also prefer it because war literally is hell,” Graham continued.

Other Republicans are also backing the diplomatic push. Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) told JI that the president would have better information on the U.S.’ progress toward its goals, but said that from what he has seen, the administration has “made a lot of progress.”

He also expressed support for the administration’s negotiations with Iran about ending the war.

“You always hope war ends,” Scott said. “I hope we’ve fulfilled our mission to destroy their ability to produce nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.”

“The administration has been very clear that they are about degrading Iran’s missile capabilities, launchers, production facilities, stockpiles, taking out their navy and their nuclear facilities,” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) told JI. “When they reach a sufficient point, that’s when it’s time to cease the shooting, and hopefully someday the Iranian people will throw off the tyrants that rule them, and we can get a better administration.”

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

STRAIT TALK

Senate Republicans express confidence, but say they haven’t heard plan for reopening Strait of Hormuz

Some disagree on who should claim ultimate responsibility for the strait — the U.S. or other countries in the region

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

GUARDING THE GATES

Rep. Brad Schneider, New Dems chair, urges Democrats to disavow Hasan Piker

Schneider called Piker ‘an unapologetic antisemite’ and warned ‘Democrats risk losing our credibility to condemn those on the right who traffic in bigotry’ if they continue to embrace him

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

SECOND ACT

Former Rep. Jamaal Bowman finds work with Track AIPAC

The ousted New York lawmaker consulted for the far-left PAC, which is partially funded by Don Henley of The Eagles

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

PAIN TO POWER

From WhatsApp chats to City Hall, a new Jewish activism is born

In the wake of Oct. 7, some in the Jewish community turned to faith, philanthropy or federal advocacy. Others set their sights closer to home, organizing to shape school boards and influence city councils

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

PERSIAN COVERAGE PUSH

Court ruling reviving VOA sparks cautious hope for expanded Iran coverage

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

IVY LEAGUE INQUIRY

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

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DEADLINE LOOMING

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

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

QUARREL ON THE QUAD

University of Michigan regent race revives campus fight over Israel

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LONE STAR LIABILITY

Israel conspiracies threaten Democratic hopes in Texas runoff race

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

HORSESHOE POLITICS

Onetime Democratic critics elevate Joe Kent’s conspiratorial resignation letter

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

Read more

SHARE

Share options

• 
  Facebook
• 
  Telegram
• 
  LinkedIn
• 
  WhatsApp
• 
  Reddit

Add JewishInsider on Google

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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