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
US May Ask Israel to Put Palestinian Tax Money Toward Trump’s Gaza Plan, Sources Say
US President Donald Trump takes part in a charter announcement for his Board of Peace initiative aimed at resolving global conflicts, alongside the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF), in Davos, Switzerland, Jan. 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
The US is considering asking Israel to give some tax money it is withholding from the Palestinian Authority to Donald Trump’s Board of Peace to fund the US president’s post-war plan for Gaza, five sources familiar with the matter said.
The Trump administration has not yet decided whether to make a formal request to Israel, said three of the sources, officials with knowledge of US deliberations with Israel.
The two other sources, Palestinians with knowledge of the deliberations, said that under the proposal a portion of the tax money would go to a US-backed transitional government for Gaza and other funds to the PA if it makes reforms.
The PA puts the amount of tax being withheld at $5 billion.
The prospect of the Palestinians’ own tax money being repurposed toward Trump’s Gaza rebuilding plan, over which their government has had no input, could further sideline the Western-backed PA even as Israel‘s withholding of the funds begets a financial crisis in the West Bank.
The PA exercises limited self-rule in the West Bank but has not had any sway over Gaza since it was exiled from the territory after a brief civil war with terrorist group Hamas in 2007.
Trump’s plan for Gaza, shattered after more than two years of war, has been held up by a refusal by Hamas to lay down their weapons.
‘MONEY HELD IN A BANK DOES NOTHING’
The Board of Peace declined to comment on whether a proposal to use Palestinian tax money was under consideration.
A Board official said it had asked all parties to leverage resources to support Trump’s rebuild plan, estimated to cost $70 billion.
“That includes the Palestinian Authority and Israel. There is no doubt that money held in a bank does nothing to further the President’s 20-Point Plan,” the official said.
That appeared to refer to the PA tax revenue that Israel has withheld from the body in a long-running dispute over payments it makes to Palestinians and their families for carrying out terrorist attacks against Israelis.
Under this policy, official payments are made to Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, the families of “martyrs” killed in attacks on Israelis, and Palestinians injured in terrorist attacks.
Reports estimate that approximately 8 percent of the PA’s budget has been allocated to paying stipends to convicted terrorists and their families.
Israel collects taxes on imported goods on behalf of the PA and is meant to transfer the revenue under a longstanding arrangement. The PA is supposed to use the funds to pay civil servants and fund public services.
The sources did not say how much of the tax money Washington was considering asking Israel to transfer to the Board.
The US State Department, Israeli government, and PA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The US and Israel have long pressured the PA to abolish payments to Palestinian prisoners and families of those killed by Israeli forces, arguing it encourages violence.
In response to US pressure, the PA in February 2025 said it was reforming the payment system, but the US said those changes did not go far enough. As punishment, Israel has withheld taxes it collects on the PA’s behalf, an amount that Palestinian officials say has reached $5 billion – well over half of the PA’s annual budget.
That has set off a financial crisis in the West Bank, with the PA slashing salaries of thousands of civil servants.
Israel accepted a US invitation to join the Board of Peace. The PA was not invited.
Under Trump’s plan, a group of Palestinian technocrats dubbed the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza would take control of Gaza from Hamas as the terrorists lay down their weapons.
Nickolay Mladenov, Trump’s Board of Peace envoy for Gaza, said during a press conference in Jerusalem on Wednesday that reconstruction planning was in advanced stages.
“We’re doing it sector by sector. We’re costing things. We’re coordinating with donors and we’re ready to begin in earnest once the conditions allow it,” Mladenov said, without mentioning the tax issue.
Uncategorized
UK Man Appears in Court Over Stabbing of Two Jewish Men in London
A police officer stands by a cordon at the scene, after a man was arrested following a stabbing incident in the Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population, in London, Britain. Photo: REUTERS/Hannah McKay
The trial of a 45-year-old man charged with attempted murder over a knife attack during which two Jewish men were stabbed will take place next March, a London court heard on Friday.
Essa Suleiman, a British national who was born in Somalia, is alleged to have tried to kill two Jewish men on April 29 in north London‘s Golders Green area, which is home to a large Jewish population.
The incident was the latest in a spate of attacks targeting Jewish premises in the area, which have left Jewish communities fearing for their safety, prompting British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to vow stronger action.
Suleiman is also charged with a third count of attempted murder, relating to an unconnected incident at the home of a former acquaintance earlier the same day, and with possession of a bladed article.
He appeared at London‘s Old Bailey court on Friday and was not asked to enter pleas to any of the four charges he faces. A date of March 1, 2027, was set for his trial, and he remains in custody.
Uncategorized
Trump Leaves Beijing With No Major Breakthroughs on Iran, Trade
Chinese President Xi Jinping inspects an honor guard with US President Donald Trump during a welcome ceremony at the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, China, May 14, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov/Pool
US President Donald Trump left China on Friday with no major breakthroughs on trade or tangible help from Beijing to end the Iran war, despite two days spent heaping praise on his host, Xi Jinping.
Trump‘s visit to America’s main strategic and economic rival, the first by a US president since his last trip in 2017, had aimed for tangible results to lift his sagging approval ratings before midterm elections in November. Xi will visit the US in the fall at Trump‘s invitation, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said.
The summit was filled with pageantry, from goose-stepping soldiers to tours of a secret garden. But behind closed doors, Xi issued a stark warning to Trump that any mishandling of China’s top concern, Taiwan, could spiral into conflict.
During a huddle with reporters on the way back to the US, Trump said Xi told him he opposed Taiwan’s independence.
“I heard him out. I didn’t make a comment … I made no commitment either way,” said Trump. He added that he will decide on a pending arms sale to Taiwan shortly, after speaking to “the person that right now is … running Taiwan.”
It was unclear if Trump was referring to Taiwan’s president, Lai Ching-te.
A direct conversation between a sitting US president and Taiwan’s leader would be unprecedented in the period since Washington shifted diplomatic recognition to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, and would likely anger China, which sees the democratically governed island as its own territory.
These were the first freewheeling remarks after two days in Beijing during which Trump stayed unusually restrained, with his off-the-cuff comments mainly focused on feting Xi‘s warmth and stature.
“It’s been an incredible visit. I think a lot of good has come of it,” Trump told Xi at their final meeting at the Zhongnanhai complex, a former imperial garden.
While Trump searched for immediate business wins, such as a deal to sell Boeing jets that did not impress investors, Xi talked up a long-term reset and pact to maintain stable trade ties with Washington, underscoring their differing priorities.
Xi pushed a new term by describing the relationship as “constructive strategic stability” – a sharp departure from the framing of “strategic competition” used by former US President Joe Biden, which Beijing disliked.
“Until now, China hasn’t proposed an alternative – now they have – if the US side agrees, that is progress,” said Da Wei, director of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.
NO HELP ON IRAN
A brief US summary of Thursday’s talks highlighted what the White House called the leaders’ shared desire to reopen the Strait of Hormuz off Iran, and Xi‘s interest in American oil purchases to pare its dependence on the Middle East.
But just before the leaders met for tea on Friday, China’s foreign ministry issued a blunt statement outlining its frustration with the war.
“This conflict, which should never have happened, has no reason to continue,” the ministry said, adding that China supported efforts to reach a peace deal in a war that had disrupted energy supplies and the global economy.
At Zhongnanhai, Trump said the leaders had discussed Iran and felt “very similar,” though Xi did not comment. On the flight back home, Trump added that he wasn’t “asking for any favors” on Iran.
Still, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had urged Beijing to use its leverage with Tehran to make a deal. But analysts doubt Xi will be willing to push Tehran hard or end support for its military, given Iran’s value to Beijing as a strategic counterweight to the US.
“What’s notable is that there’s no Chinese commitment to do anything specific with regards to Iran,” said Patricia Kim, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution.
BOEING SHARES SLIDE ON UNDERWHELMING DEAL
In another sign of a diminished scale of the summit, Trump’s readout did not mention the broad structural reforms on which previous presidents pressed Xi.
Unlike his previous trip in 2017, Trump did not discuss “structural reforms,” “global economic governance,” or the “international trading system” with Xi, according to the readout.
Even the deal touted as the biggest single deliverable from the meetings underwhelmed. Boeing stock fell 4% when Trump said on Thursday that China would buy 200 Boeing jets, significantly fewer than the roughly 500 that sources told Reuters had been under discussion.
He later added that the order could go up to 750 planes “if they do a good job with the 200.”
US officials said they had agreed deals to sell farm goods and made progress on mechanisms to manage future trade, with both sides expected to identify $30 billion of non-sensitive goods.
There were scant details of the deals, however, and no signs of a breakthrough on selling Nvidia’s advanced H200 AI chips to China, despite CEO Jensen Huang’s dramatic last-minute addition to the trip.
Trump also left without official resolution to the rare earths supply problem that has dogged ties since China imposed export controls on the vital minerals in response to Trump‘s tariff barrage in April 2025.
While the leaders struck a truce last October for Washington to lower tariffs in exchange for China keeping rare earths flowing, Beijing‘s controls have caused shortages for US chipmakers and aerospace companies.
When asked if the two sides extended the truce beyond later this year, Trump said he and Xi “did not discuss tariffs.”
Such an extension would be “the most basic benchmark” for the success of the summit, said Brookings’ Kim.
Xi‘s remarks to Trump that mishandling Taiwan, the democratically governed island Beijing claims, could lead to conflict, delivered a sharp warning during a summit that otherwise appeared friendly and relaxed.
Taiwan, 50 miles (80 km) off China’s coast, has long been a flashpoint in ties, with Beijing refusing to rule out use of military force to gain control of the island and the US bound by law to provide it the means of self-defense.
“US policy on the issue of Taiwan is unchanged as of today,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC News. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung said Taiwan would continue to deepen ties with the US and like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific, adding that China was increasing regional “risks.”