Uncategorized
Jewish progressive groups call out ‘massive attack’ on Israeli democracy in New York City rally
(New York Jewish Week) — American Jewish progressive organizations drew hundreds of New Yorkers out in the rain opposite the Israeli Consulate in Manhattan on Tuesday to show support for democracy in Israel and protest its government’s proposed court reform.
Hundreds of thousands of people across Israel have turned out to weekly protests opposing the plan, and smaller groups of Israel expatriates have held satellite protests abroad. Tuesday’s protest was different, organized and largely attended by American Jewish groups that support progressive policies in Israel.
“We are here because there is a massive attack on democracy that’s devised by extremist politicians who are corrupting Judaism to turn Israel into a fascist theocracy,” Rabbi Jill Jacobs, CEO of T’ruah, the liberal rabbinic human rights group that co-hosted the demonstration, said at the event as attendees sought shelter under umbrellas. “We are here to say that is not our Judaism, and that is not our Israel.”
The court reform plan advanced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing government would give the governing coalition total control over the appointment of Supreme Court judges, and would enable a bare majority of lawmakers to override Supreme Court decisions, among other changes. Parts of the plan passed a key legal hurdle earlier on Tuesday.
American progressive Jewish groups held a rally today at the Israeli Consulate in Manhattan to show their support for democracy in Israel.
‘We’re here because there is a massive attack on democracy’ – Rabbi Jill Jacobs of @truahrabbis pic.twitter.com/CWaqHmFv9V
— Jacob Henry (@jhenrynews) February 21, 2023
Tuesday’s rally was hosted by the Progressive Israel Network, a coalition of liberal Jewish groups including T’ruah, J Street, the New York Jewish Agenda, Ameinu, the Jewish Labor Committee, the New Israel Fund and others.
Some of those groups now find themselves in the unusual position of advocating for a stance held by a majority of Jewish Israelis. Some of the co-hosts, for example, opposed President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem, which most Jewish Israelis supported, or supported the Iran nuclear agreement, which most Jewish Israelis opposed. Not so with the court reform: The groups at the rally, and the majority of Israeli Jews, have said they oppose the plan.
“The majority of Israelis are speaking out and I hope that changes will occur,” said Matt Nosanchuk, the outgoing executive director of the New York Jewish Agenda. “Even if these reforms pass, that doesn’t mean we stop protesting. We will keep finding ways for them to be reversed.”
Jacobs told the New York Jewish Week that stopping the court reform should also be important to people who support Palestinian rights.
“This will enable this government to move forward some truly terrible moves that will have an even greater effect on the human rights of both Palestinians living under occupation and Israeli Jews,” she said.
Israel’s control of the West Bank was mentioned at the rally. New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who is Jewish, called in his speech for “an end to the occupation” and said the Democratic party “cannot continue to toe the AIPAC line,” a reference to the influential pro-Israel lobby that assertively defends Israeli policy and counters criticism of Israel.
‘We cannot continue to write a blank check to an increasingly authoritarian regime,’ Lander said.
Comptroller @bradlander said that the future of Israeli democracy requires ‘an end to the occupation.’
He added that the Democratic party ‘cannot continue to tow the AIPAC line.’
‘We cannot continue to write a blank check to an increasingly authoritarian regime,’ he said. pic.twitter.com/oCiMINxwXD
— Jacob Henry (@jhenrynews) February 22, 2023
Jonathan Kopp, a J Street board member, said democratic values shared by Israel and the United States are “under assault by this right-wing government.”
“Just as President [Joe] Biden has made protecting American democracy here [a priority], we urge him to directly confront Netanyahu’s extremist plans, which would subvert democracy in the service of settlements, demolitions and occupation,” he said.
Some participants at the rally said they wished its message went further. Eva Borgwardt, the political director of IfNotNow, a Jewish organization that opposes Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, felt advocacy for Palestinian rights felt lacking at the rally, which she said “could actually be a moment for the American progressive movement to coalesce.”
“I think that there weren’t a lot of signs about apartheid at this protest,” Borgwardt said, who was holding a sign that said “No Democracy With Apartheid.” Prominent human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have said Israel is guilty of apartheid in its treatment of the Palestinians.
“Especially with the current government, it’s becoming even more of a problem,” Borgwardt added. “We have to unify around the problem if we’re going to be powerful enough to actually achieve a solution.”
Shaul Franco, 38, an Israeli who has lived in New York for three and half years, said he came to the rally because “things have been going in a very bad trajectory for so long.” Franco added that he’s not sure if he will go back to Israel “anytime soon.”
“We want to see a much stronger pushback from the president,” Franco said. “But I don’t count on them doing Israel’s job.”
—
The post Jewish progressive groups call out ‘massive attack’ on Israeli democracy in New York City rally appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
A quiet diplomatic shift in the Middle East, with monumental consequences for Israel
Something significant is happening between Israel and Syria, and it deserves more attention than it is getting.
With the backing of the United States, Israeli and Syrian officials have agreed to create what they call a “joint fusion mechanism” — a permanent channel for coordination on intelligence, de-escalation, diplomacy and economic matters — during meetings in Paris. It appears to be the beginning of institutionalized contact between two countries that have formally been at war since 1948.
If this process continues, it will count as a genuine foreign-policy success for President Donald Trump’s administration.
To understand how profound that change would be, it is worth recalling the two countries’ shared history.
Israel and Syria — which the U.S. struck with a set of targeted attacks on the Islamic State on Saturday — have fought openly or by proxy for decades. Before 1967, Syrian artillery positions in the Golan Heights regularly shelled Israeli communities in the Hula Valley and around the Sea of Galilee. After Israel captured that region in 1967, the direct shelling stopped, but the conflict did not.
Syria remained formally committed to a state of war; Israel entrenched itself in the Golan Heights; both sides treated the frontier as a potential flashpoint to be managed carefully. After Egypt and Israel made peace in 1979, Syria became Israel’s most dangerous neighboring state.
A 1974 disengagement agreement created a United Nations-monitored buffer zone, which mostly ensured peace along the border, but did not resolve anything fundamental. In Lebanon, Israel and Syria backed opposing forces for years, and their air forces clashed briefly during the 1982 Lebanon War. Later, Iran’s growing role in Syria and Hezbollah’s military buildup added new threats. The Syrian civil war then destroyed basic state capacity and created precisely the kind of militia-rich environment Israel fears along its borders.
Now, with the dictator Bashar al-Assad gone and the former rebel leader Ahmed al-Sharaa in power, Syria is a broken country trying to stabilize. Sharaa’s past associations, disturbingly, include leadership of jihadist groups that were part of the wartime landscape in Syria. But today he governs a state facing economic collapse, infrastructure ruin and a population that needs jobs and basic services. His incentives are simple and powerful: ensure the survival of his regime, invite foreign investment, and secure relief from isolation and sanctions. Those goals point toward the U.S. and its partners, including Israel.
The Trump administration has made it clear that it wants to see new Syrian cooperation with Israel, with the suggestion that progress with Israel will become a gateway to international investment, and to a degree of political acceptance that Syria has lacked for years. Al-Sharaa’s willingness to engage is therefore not a mystery.
Israel’s motivations are also straightforward. After the Gaza war, Israel is facing a severe reputational problem. It is widely viewed abroad as reckless and excessively militarized. The government is under pressure over not only the conduct of the war but also the perception that it has no political strategy and relies almost exclusively on force. A diplomatic track with Syria allows Israel to present a very different picture: that of a country capable of negotiations with ideologically opposed neighbors, de-escalation, and regional cooperation.
There are significant security incentives, too.
Israel wants to limit Iran and Hezbollah’s influence in Syria. It wants a predictable northern border. It wants assurances regarding the Druze population in southern Syria — brethren to the Israeli Druze who are extremely loyal to the state, and who were outraged after a massacre of Syrian Druze followed the installation of al-Sharaa’s regime. It wants to ensure that no armed Syrian groups will tread near the Golan. A coordinated mechanism supervised by the U.S. offers a strong diplomatic way to address these issues.
The U.S. will benefit as well. The Trump team is eager to show that it can deliver lasting diplomatic achievements in the Middle East after the success of the Abraham Accords in Trump’s first term. A meaningful shift in Israel–Syria relations would be a very welcome addition, especially as the U.S.-brokered ceasefire in the Gaza war faces an uncertain future.
The main questions now are practical. Can the “joint fusion mechanism” function under pressure? What will happen when there is, almost inevitably, an incident — a drone downed, a militia clash, a cross-border strike? Will the new system effectively lower the temperature, or will it collapse at the first crisis?
Will Iran — facing its own profound internal political crisis — accept a Syria that coordinates with Israel under U.S. supervision, or will it work to undermine al-Sharaa? How will Hezbollah react if Damascus appears to move away from the axis of “resistance” and toward a security understanding with Israel?
How would an Israel-Syria deal impact Lebanon’s moribund efforts to dismantle Hezbollah’s military capacity? Al-Sharaa has already helped significantly by ending the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah from Iran through his territory. Might he also actively help with the disarming of the group?
No one should expect a full peace treaty soon. The question of possession of the Golan Heights probably remains a deal-breaker. Public opinion in Syria has been shaped by decades of official hostility to Israel, and Israeli politics is fragmented and volatile.
But diplomatic breakthroughs can confound expectations. They usually begin with mechanisms like this one, involving limited cooperation, routine contact and crisis management.
If this effort helps move the border from a zone of permanent tension to one of managed stability, that alone would be a major shift. It would also send a signal beyond the region: U.S. engagement still matters, and American pressure and incentives can still change behavior.
The post A quiet diplomatic shift in the Middle East, with monumental consequences for Israel appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel’s Netanyahu Hopes to ‘Taper’ Israel Off US Military Aid in Next Decade
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the press on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC, July 8, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview published on Friday that he hopes to “taper off” Israeli dependence on US military aid in the next decade.
Netanyahu has said Israel should not be reliant on foreign military aid but has stopped short of declaring a firm timeline for when Israel would be fully independent from Washington.
“I want to taper off the military within the next 10 years,” Netanyahu told The Economist. Asked if that meant a tapering “down to zero,” he said: “Yes.”
Netanyahu said he told President Donald Trump during a recent visit that Israel “very deeply” appreciates “the military aid that America has given us over the years, but here too we’ve come of age and we’ve developed incredible capacities.”
In December, Netanyahu said Israel would spend 350 billion shekels ($110 billion) on developing an independent arms industry to reduce dependency on other countries.
In 2016, the US and Israeli governments signed a memorandum of understanding for the 10 years through September 2028 that provides $38 billion in military aid, $33 billion in grants to buy military equipment and $5 billion for missile defense systems.
Israeli defense exports rose 13 percent last year, with major contracts signed for Israeli defense technology including its advanced multi-layered aerial defense systems.
US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch Israel supporter and close ally of Trump, said on X that “we need not wait ten years” to begin scaling back military aid to Israel.
“The billions in taxpayer dollars that would be saved by expediting the termination of military aid to Israel will and should be plowed back into the US military,” Graham said. “I will be presenting a proposal to Israel and the Trump administration to dramatically expedite the timetable.”
Uncategorized
In Rare Messages from Iran, Protesters ask West for Help, Speak of ‘Very High’ Death Toll
Protests in Tehran. Photo: Iran Photo from social media used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law, via i24 News
i24 News – Speaking to Western media from beyond the nationwide internet blackout imposed by the Islamic regime, Iranian protesters said they needed support amid a brutal crackdown.
“We’re standing up for a revolution, but we need help. Snipers have been stationed behind the Tajrish Arg area [a neighborhood in Tehran],” said a protester in Tehran speaking to the Guardian on the condition of anonymity. He added that “We saw hundreds of bodies.”
Another activist in Tehran spoke of witnessing security forces firing live ammunition at protesters resulting in a “very high” number killed.
On Friday, TIME magazine cited a Tehran doctor speaking on condition of anonymity that just six hospitals in the capital recorded at least 217 killed protesters, “most by live ammunition.”
Speaking to Reuters on Saturday, Setare Ghorbani, a French-Iranian national living in the suburbs of Paris, said that she became ill from worry for her friends inside Iran. She read out one of her friends’ last messages before losing contact: “I saw two government agents and they grabbed people, they fought so much, and I don’t know if they died or not.”