Uncategorized
How a once-cautious Benjamin Netanyahu came to lead the most radical coalition in Israel’s history
(JTA) — Twenty-seven years have passed since Benjamin Netanyahu was first elected as Israel’s prime minister. Since 1996, he has headed six governments over a period of more than 15 years, more than any other prime minister. Unfortunately, his current coalition is one of the most radical-populist governments in Israel’s history. This government seeks to rapidly undermine Israel’s democracy by granting unlimited political power to the executive branch of government at the expense of the judiciary.
How can Netanyahu — a U.S.-educated and respected world leader who was cautious in his approach to building previous coalitions, and was once respectful of Israeli democratic institutions — support such a dangerous plan? Was the “writing on the wall” earlier on in his lengthy tenure?
A glimpse into Netanyahu’s years in office reveals that, indeed, signs of his being a populist leader — specializing in attacks against the so-called elite — could be detected long ago. As Likud leader in 1993, Netanyahu was blamed for ignoring the incitement by extremists that preceded the assignation of Yitzhak Rabin (a charge he vociferously denies). As early as 1997, during his first term as prime minister, he said that “the left has forgotten what it means to be Jewish.” Two years later, during an election campaign, he mocked the “leftist” press by saying “they are scared” (by the possibility of a right-wing victory). On Election Day in 2015, he posted a video urging Likud supporters to go out and vote by warning, “the Arabs are heading in droves to the polls.” That message led to accusations that the candidate was using racial dog whistles to motivate his followers.
However, Netanyahu’s populist discourse and his natural divide-and-conquer leadership style were balanced out, at least until 2015, by several factors. First, Netanyahu always sought to include centrist and even left-of-center parties in his coalition governments. Even when he could build a “pure” right-wing coalition (following the 2009 elections, for example), he preferred to invite partners from the opposing political side. His intention, he once said, was to provide a “wide and stable government that unites the people.”
Second, despite his hawkish image and his hardline discourse on security issues, Netanyahu wa considered to be an exceedingly cautious leader in that arena. Risk-averse, he tended to avoid involving Israel in major wars and was wary of acting in ways that would spark violence between Israelis and Palestinians.
Third, over his many years in office, he had demonstrated respect for the rules of the game — and towards Israel’s Supreme Court. He even blocked earlier initiatives that sought to undermine the power of the judicial branch. “I believe that in a democracy, a strong and independent Court is what enables the existence of all other democratic institutions,” he said in 2012. “Every time a law comes across my desk that threatens to impair the independence of the courts, we will take it down.”
The 2015 elections should probably be regarded as the turning point, after which these balancing factors quickly gave way to unabashed populism. The unexpected resounding victory in that year’s elections brought out the hubris in Netanyahu. He formed a right-wing coalition government (only slightly moderated by Moshe Kahlon’s centrist Kulanu party), personally held four ministerial positions in addition to the prime ministership, and gave his blessing to the hugely controversial Nation-State Bill. This legislation, which anchored in law Israel’s status as the “national home of the Jewish people,” strengthened the Jewish component of Israel’s dual “Jewish and democratic” identity without in turn strengthening its democratic component — explicitly and implicitly downgrading minority rights.
Furthermore, Netanyahu’s longtime obsession with controlling press coverage reached a new level. His insistence on personally heading the Ministry of Communications and his excessive involvement in media — for example, installing a close ally as director-general of the ministry, and targeting and strong-arming ostensibly “unfriendly” newspapers and broadcasters — served as the background for two of the three indictments for which he is currently on trial.
The investigations on corruption charges, and his subsequent trial, further pushed Netanyahu toward populist extremes. Following three rounds of elections between 2019 and 2020, which threw Israel into an unprecedented political crisis, Netanyahu was forced to form a unity government with former Gen. Benny Gantz’s centrist Blue & White party. Coincidentally, just a few hours after the government’s first meeting, Netanyahu’s trial began in the Jerusalem District Court. The prime minister arrived at the court on May 24, 2020, accompanied by several Likud Knesset members, and launched a fierce attack:
What is on trial today is an effort to frustrate the will of the people — the attempt to bring down me and the right-wing camp. For more than a decade, the left has failed to do this at the ballot box. So over the last few years, they have discovered a new method: some segments in the police and the prosecution have joined forces with the leftist media… to manufacture baseless and absurd charges against me.
These statements made it clear that Netanyahu had crossed the Rubicon, setting the tone for his behavior ever since. He dispensed with the partnership with Gantz, sacrificing Israel’s economic and political interests along with it. In the build-up to the next elections, he legitimized extremist, racist politicians such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, who are today members of his governing coalition. After failing to form a government in 2021 (having been ousted from power after more than 12 consecutive years), he violated fundamental parliamentary conventions and norms. For instance, he instructed his right-wing allies to boycott Knesset committees and refused to attend the customary “update meeting” the parliamentary opposition leader holds with the prime minister. His previous respect for the rules of the game and democratic institutions was a thing of the past.
In that sense, it is no wonder that the current government he has formed, following his victory in the 2022 elections, is relentlessly pushing the overhaul of the judicial system, with little regard to the dangers the legislation poses to Israel’s democracy. This is due to a combination of Netanyahu’s own self-interest regarding his trial and the interests and worldviews of his political partners — politicians who hold extreme views (Ben-Gvir, Smotrich) as well as those who have previous corruption charges hanging over their heads (Aryeh Deri, leader of the haredi Orthodox Shas party).
The “old Bibi” would have never coalesced with such radical forces and would have never so bluntly disregarded democratic norms. But hubris, an instinct for self-preservation and his high self-regard as the “indispensable man” of Israeli politics created a new Bibi – and a crisis unlike anything Israel has ever seen.
Ironically, Netanyahu finds himself in an unexpected position — as the moderating force in the most radical coalition in Israel’s history. He could tap the instincts that he once had and be the voice of reason, the one who plugs the dike with his finger. He has the chance to lead Israel to a major constitutional moment. Will he rise to this historical challenge?
—
The post How a once-cautious Benjamin Netanyahu came to lead the most radical coalition in Israel’s history appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Pro-Israel Group Issues Slate of Democratic Endorsements in US Congressional Races
Supporters of Democratic Majority for Israel. Photo: Screenshot
A leading pro-Israel Democratic organization is stepping into a series of competitive US House primaries, aiming to bolster candidates who it says can both defend the US–Israel alliance and help Democrats reclaim the majority in 2026.
The Democratic Majority for Israel’s political action committee, DMFI PAC, on Thursday unveiled its first slate of endorsements this 2026 election cycle, targeting nearly a dozen open-seat and battleground contests across the country. The move underscores how support for Israel remains a defining issue within a party navigating internal divisions over Middle East policy.
Among the most closely watched races are several swing districts seen as pivotal to Democratic hopes of flipping the House from Republican control. In Colorado’s 8th District, state lawmaker Shannon Bird secured the group’s backing. In Pennsylvania, endorsements went to Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti in the 8th District and former television anchor Janelle Stelson in the 10th.
The PAC also threw support behind former Rep. Elaine Luria in Virginia’s 2nd District, a perennial battleground seat, and Texas candidate Johnny Garcia in the 35th District.
In addition to those high-profile contests, the organization endorsed a group of candidates running in open or crowded Democratic primaries, including Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller in Illinois, former Rep. Melissa Bean also in Illinois, Maryland candidate Adrian Boafo, Michigan state Sen. Jeremy Moss, New York contender Cait Conley, and New Hampshire Democrat Maura Sullivan.
DMFI leaders say the endorsements reflect a dual strategy: reinforcing Democratic support for Israel as a key democratic ally in a volatile region, while elevating candidates viewed as broadly electable in general elections. The group argues that backing Israel’s security and right to defend itself against terrorist threats is consistent with Democratic values and national security priorities.
“These endorsements reflect our belief that supporting Israel and winning elections go hand in hand,” said Kathy Manning, former congresswoman and DMFI PAC board member. “The US–Israel relationship has long been a bipartisan pillar of American foreign policy because it’s critical to our security and intelligence capabilities – and it remains a view shared by the majority of Democratic voters. DMFI PAC is proud to support candidates who reflect those values and who can help strengthen the Democratic caucus in Congress.”
The announcement comes as debates over US policy toward Israel and Gaza continue to animate Democratic primaries. While some progressive lawmakers have pushed for new conditions on US aid and have condemned Israel’s military operations in Gaza, pro-Israel advocates maintain that steadfast support for Israel strengthens both American strategic interests and the party’s standing with moderate and swing voters.
In the two years following the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, the relationship between the Jewish state and the Democratic Party has deteriorated dramatically. Overwhelming numbers of Democrats indicate a negative perception of Israel in polling. Moreover, recent surveys have shown a supermajority of Democrats claim that Israel has committed a “genocide” in Gaza, a narrative that Israel vehemently rejects and of which there is little substantiation.
Further, the cratering support for Israel among Democratic voters has caused many liberal politicians to distance themselves from Israel-aligned organizations such as DMFI and AIPAC, the preeminent pro-Israel lobbying group in the US.
“Winning back the House requires Democrats to nominate candidates who can build broad coalitions and win in November,” said Brian Romick, chair of DMFI PAC. “These endorsements reflect that reality. DMFI PAC is the only organization focused on electing Democrats to the majority while also ensuring pro-Israel Democrats can win in competitive primary and general elections.”
Uncategorized
Dear internet: Having Jews in movies isn’t ‘Zionist propaganda’
There’s a joke in Blazing Saddles, about an event that took place several thousand years ago, that maybe hasn’t aged so well.
It’s in the scene where Harvey Korman’s conniving Attorney General Hedley Lamarr brainstorms plans to clear away the town of Rock Ridge. Lamarr’s lackey Taggart, played by Slim Pickens, makes a modest proposal: “We’ll kill the firstborn male child in every household.”
Lamarr considers the idea, before dismissing it. “Too Jewish,” he says.
When I heard that quip in a recent rewatch with my girlfriend (her first time), I saw a new reason why you couldn’t make the film today: Modern audiences, particularly those amateur critics itching to sound off online, seem to have more fluency in blood libels about Jews than the Passover narrative Mel Brooks and Co. were riffing on. For those who think the Epstein files contain damning proof of elites eating babies, “too Jewish” might seem like an admission. For the many more who look upon Zion as the source of the world’s ills, a misreading of the gag would likely go viral.
True, Blazing Saddles was made in 1974, well before the recent carnage in Gaza. But I could imagine the rejoinders — “Israel has been killing kids since 1948!”
I put the “too Jewish” joke out of mind for a bit. I decided I was overstating just how wrong people on the internet could be. And then I encountered a post on X. It was responding to a screenshot from Marty Supreme, where the title character presents his mother with a chunk of the pyramids. “We built that,” he says.
“This is Zionist propaganda,” an eagle-eyed netizen wrote, to the tune of nearly 96,000 likes, 11,000 reposts and 7 million views. The self-professed “archeology (sic) major” took the occasion to correct this humorous expression of the collosal self-regard of an antihero ping-pong hustler with proof that this particular Wonder of the World was the work of well-respected Egyptian craftsmen and so (somehow) invalidates the Jewish national project.
Someone else said the film, which nowhere mentions Israel, was Zionist. A Letterboxd review is terse in its description: “if the spiritually Israeli term was a movie.”
This failure to grasp Jewish references that have their own ontology — or the desire to graft more recent ones onto them — is becoming a theme.
Last year, The Brutalist, was mired in a debate about whether or not its subplot about the newly formed Jewish state was an endorsement or indictment of national ambitions in the Levant. (In entering this particular fray, most missed the point: Recent survivors of the Holocaust discussed and argued about Israel, some moved there, others didn’t and a film can present this reality without offering a judgment either way.)
When I see these takes, I beat my chest as if performing viddui over the death of media literacy.
As a critic for a Jewish publication, whose remit is to read deeply into even the most tenuous of Jewish subtexts, this pains me. Not because I myself have offended (though perhaps I have), but because I take the work seriously and try my hardest not to impose on art something that just isn’t there. I’m reminded of Freud’s famous remark: “Sometimes a cigar is a phallic metaphor for Jewish domination on stolen Palestinian land.”
Sorry, that wasn’t it at all, was it?
What the terminally online crowd often mean to say when they shout “Zionist propaganda” is “there are Jews in this!” It’s not a great way to interpret art, and it undermines the legitimacy of the argument that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. But a film need not even have Jews in it for some to claim it’s really about Israel.
My colleagues and I have written about how Dune, Superman, and Zootopia 2 have been seized by the internet as part of the monomyth of Israeli villainy. When people make these connections, they may believe they’re thinking deeply, but they’re really just reaching for the nearest headline or playing to their own biases.
This insistence on Israel as the ultimate Big Bad reminds me of a remark made by Denise Gough, an actor in the Star Wars series Andor (another property said to be about Israel-Palestine, even though the creator Tony Gilroy mentioned numerous historical inspirations, most directly the Wannsee Conference). In an interview, Gough said a fan sent her a Star Wars analogy, which she said she only half understood.
The fan argued that just as the Death Star, a planet-destroying weapon, has an Achilles’ heel in its exhaust port, that when fired at explodes the whole thing, the conflicts of the world have a focal point in Palestine from which the architecture of oppression can be demolished.
“If we can free Palestine,” Gough concluded, “it explodes everything.” “Everything,” here, being unrelated atrocities in Sudan, Congo and Nigeria.
Let’s leave aside the fact that Gough, an actor in a Star Wars property, is somehow unfamiliar with the most iconic scene in the franchise, and what that level of research might connote for her understanding of the dynamics of the Middle East.
What she is really demonstrating, when she mentions other countries rocked by violence, is something much scarier: how the conspiratorial, magical thinking that all wrongs lead back to Israel — and that everything is a metaphor for it — echoes tropes of Jewish control and is ultimately an excuse for an exclusive fixation. Turn off the targeting computer that acknowledges complexity. Use the force, Denise! Get rid of the Zionist entity, every other crisis will sort itself out!
And so, I worry that Jewish stories — or even jokes — will stop being seen outside of a context of Israel’s actions and that metaphors and allegory will lose their elasticity, all looping back to a unified theory of evil Jews. Not for everyone, but for enough people to make a difference.
The Jewish story is textured, complex and anything but unified. Marty Supreme, The Brutalist and Blazing Saddles, each make this case. Those who see only one narrative not only miss the plot, they miss out on what good art does best.
The post Dear internet: Having Jews in movies isn’t ‘Zionist propaganda’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
France Moves to Criminalize Anti-Zionism Amid Surging Wave of Antisemitism Targeting Jews, Israelis
French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu delivers a speech at the National Assembly in Paris, France, Jan. 20, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Sarah Meyssonnier
The French government is moving to criminalize anti-Zionism in a sweeping bid to confront a deepening surge in antisemitism targeting Jews and Israelis across the country, as officials warn of a growing climate of fear and intimidation nationwide.
Speaking at the annual gathering of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF), the main representative body of French Jews, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu announced that the government would introduce a bill criminalizing anti-Zionist expressions, signaling a move to tackle antisemitism in all its forms, not just traditional manifestations.
“To define oneself as anti-Zionist is to question Israel’s right to exist. It’s a call for the destruction of an entire people under the guise of ideology,” the French leader said.
“There is a difference between legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and rejecting the very existence of the Jewish state. This ‘blurring’ must stop,” he continued.
“Calling for the destruction of the State of Israel is calling to endanger the lives of a people and cannot be tolerated any longer,” Lecornu added. “Hatred of Jews is hatred of the Republic and a stain on France.”
The European Jewish Congress (EJC) commended Lecornu’s announcement, praising him “for his clear and principled commitment to criminalize calls for the destruction of any state, including Israel.”
“Calling for the destruction of the State of Israel is calling to endanger the lives of a people and cannot be tolerated any longer”
We commend
PM @SebLecornu for his clear and principled commitment to criminalize calls for the destruction of any state, including Israel. pic.twitter.com/dvCd2iMtUB
— European Jewish Congress (@eurojewcong) February 20, 2026
During the ceremony, CRIF president Yonathan Arfi warned that Jewish communities in France are under mounting threat, stressing the urgent need for action against the country’s rising antisemitism.
“Antisemitism knows no truce. The conflict in the Middle East has acted as a catalyst. But the hatred growing in our country is a French problem, and there is no reason to expect a rapid decline,” Arfi said.
In April, the French government is expected to endorse a private bill proposed by Jewish Member of Parliament Caroline Yadan, who represents French citizens abroad — including thousands living in Israel — with backing from right-wing parties likely ensuring the majority needed to pass the legislation.
Yadan explained that the bill is designed to combat emerging forms of antisemitism, emphasizing the urgent need for stronger legal measures to protect Jewish communities in France.
“This is a clear statement: Our Republic will not become accustomed, will not look the other way, and will never abandon the Jews of France,” the French lawmaker said.
« Il faut une étape supplémentaire : appeler à la destruction d’Israël, c’est appeler à la mise en danger de tout un peuple. »
Je remercie le Premier ministre @SebLecornu d’avoir annoncé, ce soir, lors du dîner du @Le_CRIF, l’examen, en avril prochain, de ma proposition de loi… pic.twitter.com/hruoRSP5iE
— Caroline Yadan (@CarolineYADAN) February 19, 2026
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, France has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
According to the French Interior Ministry’s annual report on anti-religious acts, antisemitism in France remained alarmingly high last year, with 1,320 incidents recorded across the country.
Although the total number of antisemitic outrages in 2025 fell by 16 percent compared to 2024’s second highest ever total of 1,570 cases, the report warned that antisemitism remains “historically high,” with more than 3.5 attacks occurring every day.
The most recent figure of total antisemitic incidents represents a 21 percent decline from 2023’s record high of 1,676 incidents, but a 203 percent increase from the 436 antisemitic acts recorded in 2022, before the Oct. 7 atrocities.
Even though Jews make up less than 1 percent of France’s population, they accounted for 53 percent of all religiously motivated crimes last year.
Between 2022 and 2025, antisemitic attacks across France quadrupled, leaving the Jewish community more exposed than ever.