Uncategorized
Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives
WASHINGTON (JTA) — The op-ed was typical of the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial page, extolling the virtues of moderation in all things.
The difference was that the author of the piece published Wednesday, Bezalel Smotrich, has a reputation for extremism, and the political landscape he was imagining is in Israel, not America.
Experts who track the U.S.-Israel relationship say the op-ed had a clear purpose: to quell the fears of American conservatives whom Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long cultivated as allies and who may be rattled by his new extremist partners in governing Israel.
Those partners include Smotrich, the Religious Zionist bloc leader and self-described “proud homophobe” whom Israeli intelligence officials have accused of planning terrorist attacks — and who was sworn in as finance minister in Netanyahu’s new government Thursday. They also include Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has been convicted of incitement for his past support of Jewish terrorists, who will oversee Israel’s police.
The presence of Smotrich, Ben-Gvir and their parties in Netanyahu’s governing coalition has alarmed American liberals, including some in the Biden administration. But insiders say conservatives are feeling spooked, too.
“The conservative right was with [Netanyahu] and now he seems to be riding the tiger of the radical right,” said David Makovsky, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who just returned from a tour of Israel where he met with senior officials of both the outgoing and incoming governments. “And I think that is bound to alienate the very people who counted on him being risk-averse and to focus on the economy.”
In his op-ed published on Tuesday, two days before the new Israeli government was sworn in, Smotrich sought to persuade Americans that the new government is not the hotbed of ultranationalist and religious extremism it has been made out to be in the American press.
“The U.S. media has vilified me and the traditionalist bloc to which I belong since our success in Israel’s November elections,” he wrote. “They say I am a right-wing extremist and that our bloc will usher in a ‘halachic state’ in which Jewish law governs. In reality, we seek to strengthen every citizen’s freedoms and the country’s democratic institutions, bringing Israel more closely in line with the liberal American model.”
The op-ed is at odds with the stated aims of the coalition agreements; whereas Smotrich says there will be no legal changes to disputed areas in the West Bank, the agreements include a pledge to annex areas at an unspecified time, and to legalize outposts deemed illegal even under Israeli law. He says changes to religious practice will not involve coercion, but the agreement allows businesses to decline service “because of a religious belief,” which a member of his party has anticipated could extend to declining service to LGBTQ people.
Netanyahu has alienated the American left with his relentless attacks on its preference for a two-state outcome to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which he perceives as dangerous and naive. (He also differs from them on how to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.) He has instead cultivated a base on the right through close ties with the Republican Party and among evangelicals, made possible in part because he has long espoused the values traditional conservatives hold dear, including free markets and a united robust Western stance against extremism and terrorism.
But his alliance with Smotrich and others perceived as theocratic extremists may be a bridge too far even for Netanyahu’s conservative friends, who champion democratic values overseas, said Dov Zakheim, a veteran defense official in multiple Republican administrations.
“Traditional conservatives are much closer to the Bushes, and Jim Baker and those sorts of folks,” he said, referring to the two former presidents and the secretary of state under the late George H. W. Bush.
Jonathan Schanzer, a vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the op-ed was likely written at Netanyahu’s behest with those conservatives in mind.
“The Wall Street Journal piece was designed to appeal to traditional conservatives,” he said. “It was designed to send a message to the American public writ large that the way in which Smotrich and perhaps [Itamar] Ben Gvir have been described is based on past utterances and not necessarily their forward-looking policies.”
The immediate predicate for the op-ed, insiders say, was likely a New York Times editorial on Dec. 17 that called the incoming government “a significant threat to the future of Israel” because of the extremist positions Smotrich and other partners have embraced, including the annexation of the West Bank, restrictions on non-Orthodox and non-Jewish citizens, diminishing the independence of the courts, reforming the Law of Return that would render ineligible huge chunks of Diaspora Jewry, and anti-LGBTQ measures.
Smotrich in his op-ed casts the changes not as radical departures from democratic norms but as tweaks that would align Israel more with U.S. values. He said he would pursue a “broad free-market policy” as finance minister. He likened religious reforms to the Supreme Court decision that allowed Christian service providers to decline work from LGBTQ couples.
“For example, arranging for a minuscule number of sex-separated beaches, as we propose, scarcely limits the choices of the majority of Israelis who prefer mixed beaches,” Smotrich wrote. “It simply offers an option to others.”
In the West Bank, Smotrich said, his finance ministry would promote the building of infrastructure and employment which would benefit Israeli Jewish settlers and Palestinians alike. “This doesn’t entail changing the political or legal status of the area.”
Such salves contradict the stated aims of the new government’s coalition agreement, Anshel Pfeffer, a Netanyahu biographer and analyst for Haaretz said in a Twitter thread picking apart Smotrich’s op-ed.
“Smotrich says his policy doesn’t mean changing the political or legal status of the occupied territories while annexation actually appears in the coalition agreement and his plans certainly change the legal status of the settlements,” Pfeffer said.
Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said foreign media alarm at the composition of the incoming government was premature.
“I suspect that the vast mass of people will maintain the support that they have for Israel because it hasn’t got anything to do with the passing of one government to another and has everything to do with the principle that Israel is a pro-American democracy in a region that’s pretty important,” she said.
That said, Pletka said, the changes in policy embraced by Smotrich and his cohort could alienate Americans should they become policy.
“I think a lot of things can change if the rhetoric from Netanyahu’s government becomes policy, but right now, it’s rhetoric,” she said. “What you tend to see in normal governments is that they need to make a series of compromises between rhetoric that plays to their base and governance.”
Pletka said Netanyahuu’s stated ambition to expand the 2020 Abraham Accords to peace with Saudi Arabia would likely inhibit plans by Smotrich to annex the West Bank. In the summer of 2020, the last time Netanyahu planned annexation, the United Arab Emirates, one of the four Arab Parties to the Abraham Accords, threatened to pull out unless Netanyahu pulled back — which he did.
“It’s not just the relationship with the United States,” she said. “This might alienate their new friends in the Gulf, which, at the end of the day, may actually have more serious consequences.”
Netanyahu has repeatedly sought to relay the impression that he will keep his coalition partners on a short leash.
“They’re joining me, I’m not joining them,” he said earlier this month. “I’ll have two hands firmly on the steering wheel. I won’t let anybody do anything to LGBT [people] or to deny our Arab citizens their rights or anything like that.”
Zakheim said that Netanyahu, who is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, from 1996 to 1999 and then from 2009 to 2021, has proven chops at steering rangy coalitions — but there are two key differences now.
Netanyahu wants his coalition partners to pass a law that would effectively end his trial for criminal fraud, and so they exercise unprecedented leverage over him. Additionally, Netanyahu in the past has faced the greatest pressure from haredi Orthodox parties, who are susceptible to suasion by funding their impoverished sector. That’s not true of his new ideologically driven partners.
“If you look at his past governments, he has really never been forced into real policy decisions by those to the right of him,” Zekheim said. “Now he’s got a problem because these 15 or so seats of those to his right are interested in policy, not just in money.”
Makovsky said Netanyahu appears to be leaving behind a conservatism that was sympathetic to the outlook of its American counterpart.
“His success has been that he’s a stabilizer. He’s risk-averse. He’s focused on the prosperity of the country, with high-tech success. He’s the one to be seen as the tenacious guardian against Iranian nuclear influence,” he said. “And those are things people could relate to. Now, it just seems like he’s just throwing the playbook out the window.”
—
The post Netanyahu’s new government could lose a critical constituency: American conservatives appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
ADL launches ‘Mamdani monitor’ as Jewish groups retool for post-election advocacy
As New York City woke up to a new mayor-elect on Wednesday, Jewish groups that spurned Zohran Mamdani faced a decision — how to react to a leader whose staunch criticism of Israel flew in the face of their core beliefs.
Their first responses ranged from despondent to optimistic, with aims from seeking unity to staging a battlefield.
Jonathan Greenblatt, the Anti-Defamation League chief who railed against Mamdani throughout the race, convened a briefing on Wednesday to discuss grappling with the new administration. He announced a “Mamdani Monitor,” a public tracker of Mamdani’s policies and personnel appointments that the ADL viewed as threatening Jewish security.
“We’re deeply concerned about what the next four years could augur for Jewish New Yorkers — the antisemitic language that he has promoted, the antisemitic policies that he’s championed, the antisemitic extremists who he’s known to affiliate with,” Greenblatt said.
Greenblatt cited Mamdani’s support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel and past rhetoric about the Israeli army as evidence that “this mayor will not have our backs.” Under Greenblatt’s leadership, the ADL has narrowed its civil rights mission to focus on combating antisemitism and anti-Zionism.
Mamdani crested to victory as the city’s first Muslim mayor without a majority of Jewish voters, who have split over his staunch criticism of Israel. Early exit polls from CNN indicate that he won just over 50% of voters but only 33% of Jewish voters, while his pro-Israel opponent Andrew Cuomo won nearly twice as many, at 63%.
Greenblatt said the ADL was closely watching Mamdani with a list of demands. Those included no appointments of people with records of antisemitism, NYPD protection for synagogues and Jewish day schools, and “factual, unbiased education about the Middle East” in schools. He also said it was “very important” to maintain NYPD partnerships with Israeli counterintelligence and counterterrorism efforts.
Hindy Poupko, the chief strategy officer at UJA-Federation of New York, also said her organization was preparing to combat potential Mamdani policies that aligned with BDS. She said that UJA hoped to lobby for broadening a state-level anti-BDS order, passed by Cuomo as governor, so that it would apply to New York City.
“We need to expand that Cuomo executive order to cover City Hall, because it would be devastating on many fronts — not to mention economically devastating for New Yorkers — if the Mamdani administration engaged in any kind of BDS activity,” said Poupko.
Asked if they would meet with Mamdani, both Greenblatt and Poupko gave qualified answers.
“I will not meet him on my own,” said Greenblatt. “I think we have a responsibility to our fellowship as Jews. I’m not going to do that meeting without UJA. I’m not going to do that meeting without some spiritual leadership as well.”
Poupko said, “The ball’s in his court.” If Mamdani took actions to “put Jewish New Yorkers at ease,” then she said UJA leaders would meet him.
Mamdani was asked about Greenblatt’s proposed “Mamdani Monitor” in a press conference on Wednesday.
“I think that anyone is free to catalog the actions of our administration,” he answered. “I have some doubts in Jonathan’s ability to do so honestly, given that he previously said I had not visited any synagogues, only to have to correct himself.”
Greenblatt incorrectly stated that Mamdani had not visited “a single synagogue” during a CNBC interview in August. He later said he meant that Mamdani had not visited any synagogues since the June primary.
The ADL and UJA were not alone in mourning Mamdani’s victory. The New York Board of Rabbis and other leading Jewish institutions in the city said in a joint statement, “We cannot ignore that the Mayor-elect holds core beliefs fundamentally at odds with our community’s deepest convictions and most cherished values.” They added that they would continue to work with every level of government.
Rabbi Marc Schneier, who heads The Hampton Synagogue on Long Island and backed Cuomo, said he planned to establish the first Jewish day school in the Hamptons as a haven for “thousands of Jewish families” fleeing “the antisemitic climate of Mamdani’s New York City.”
Meanwhile, the Republican Jewish Coalition called Mamdani’s victory “a deeply distressing result for New Yorkers, particularly Jewish New Yorkers,” and accused his entire party of condoning antisemitism. “There is only ONE party in this country fighting antisemitism and supporting Israel, and it is the Republican Party,” said the coalition.
Other past critics of Mamdani seemed ready to put the election behind them. The pro-Israel billionaire Bill Ackman, whose prolific and protracted attacks on Mamdani during the campaign often predicted an apocalyptic city under his leadership, appeared to offer an olive branch just hours after predicting Cuomo would prevail.
“Congrats on the win,” Ackman said to Mamdani on X. “Now you have a big responsibility. If I can help NYC, just let me know what I can do.”
Some voices emphasized mending the divisions that roiled Jewish communities throughout the race. The Union for Reform Judaism, which urged its rabbis not to endorse candidates despite intense pressure from congregants, pressed Jews to “help lower the temperature, listen generously, and take steps to promote healing” in the aftermath of the election.
“Reasonable people across the political spectrum — and across the Jewish community — must aspire to respectfully disagree, and we will do our part to bring people together without erasing real differences,” the group said. They added that they welcomed cooperation with Mamdani and would hold him accountable to “his commitments to protect Jewish communities and all New Yorkers.”
Noting that City Hall does not have a foreign policy, the organization said it would “not hesitate to push back if anti-Israel policies or rhetoric make Jewish New Yorkers who are deeply attached to Israel more anxious and less safe.”
Other Jewish leaders are looking toward a future under Mamdani not with dismay or caution, but with jubilation. Activists from left-wing groups like Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, which have bolstered Mamdani’s rise to power, celebrated the victory at his watch party on Tuesday night. Several people there told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency they would finally have an ally in City Hall who aligned with their views on issues from income inequality to Palestinian rights.
Rabbi Lauren Grabelle Herrmann, who leads the SAJ synagogue on the Upper West Side, urged congregants with wide-ranging reactions to the election to keep in mind their shared hopes for the well-being of all Jews and New Yorkers.
She quoted the prophet Jeremiah, writing, “Seek the welfare of the city to which I have exiled you and pray to God on its behalf; for in its prosperity you shall prosper.”
—
The post ADL launches ‘Mamdani monitor’ as Jewish groups retool for post-election advocacy appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Mamdani condemns swastika graffiti at Brooklyn yeshiva as ‘disgusting and heartbreaking’
The incident that prompted Zohran Mamdani’s first condemnation of local antisemitism since he was elected mayor took place just minutes after the race was called in his favor.
Two red swastikas were spray-painted on Magen David Yeshivah in Brooklyn on Tuesday night, according to footage shared on social media and the New York Police Department, which said the vandalism occurred at 9:53 p.m.
Other Jewish sites in the city were also vandalized, Gov. Kathy Hochul said without offering details.
At the time, Mamdani was on the verge of giving a victory speech that reiterated a pledge to protest Jewish New Yorkers. On Wednesday, he condemned the Magen David Yeshivah vandalism specifically.
“This is a disgusting and heartbreaking act of antisemitism, and it has no place in our beautiful city,” wrote Mamdani in a post on X. “As Mayor, I will always stand steadfast with our Jewish neighbors to root the scourge of antisemitism out of our city.”
A spokesperson for the NYPD said Wednesday afternoon that there had been no arrests and an investigation into the incident was ongoing. The incident was being investigated as a hate crime, the spokesperson said.
Magen David Yeshiva declined to comment on the vandalism. Its principal reportedly told families that security had been increased in response to the graffiti.
The school is located in Gravesend, a hub of New York City’s Sephardic Jewish community. It had required parents to prove they had registered to vote before the school year, as part of a push within the community to oppose Mamdani largely because of his rhetoric on Israel.
Two-thirds of the neighborhood’s voters cast their ballots for former Gov. Andrew Cuomo during the general election, compared to 22% for Mamdani.
Outgoing New York City Mayor Eric Adams did not immediately issue a public comment on the vandalism. Hochul condemned the vandalism in a post on X, where she said the yeshiva was “one of several Jewish sites defiled last night with spray-painted swastikas.”
An NYPD spokesperson said that a construction site located on McDonald Avenue and Bay Parkway, about a block from the school, was also vandalized with a swastika. The spokesperson could not say whether the second location was a Jewish institution.
UJA-Federation of New York condemned the vandalism in a post on X, writing, “This act is a painful reminder of the rising tide of antisemitism that continues to threaten Jewish communities across New York.”
Some of Mamdani’s critics challenged him to respond to the vandalism. The Republican Jewish Coalition, which hosted a convention where Mamdani was a liberal punching bag in Las Vegas last weekend, took to Facebook to demand he denounce it.
“This reprehensible and odious vandalism must be unequivocally condemned by City leaders, especially Mayor-Elect Mamdani,” the RJC said in a post that went up nine minutes after Mamdani’s. “It is his solemn responsibility to protect ALL New Yorkers, and this is his first true test of leadership.”
At a press conference Wednesday morning in Queens, Mamdani told reporters that he was looking forward to “being the mayor for every person that calls this city home,” including the “Jewish New Yorkers that voted for our campaign and those that didn’t.”
“I take the issue of antisemitism incredibly seriously,” he continued, in response to a question about the Anti-Defamation League’s new monitor to track his administration’s actions. “And last night in my speech, I spoke about how my City Hall will stand steadfast with Jewish New Yorkers in fighting the scourge of antisemitism across the city and making that clear in the actions that we deliver on from January 1st.”
—
The post Mamdani condemns swastika graffiti at Brooklyn yeshiva as ‘disgusting and heartbreaking’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Heritage Foundation staff confront president over antisemitism, defense of Tucker Carlson
The president of the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, apologized to his staff on Wednesday for his refusal to condemn Tucker Carlson after the right-wing broadcaster aired a friendly interview with white nationalist Nick Fuentes.
During a tense, two-hour all-hands meetings, staff members challenged Roberts’ leadership, questioned Heritage’s credibility, and warned that his stance had gravely damaged the foundation’s relationships with Jewish partners and donors
“I made a mistake and I let you down and I let down this institution. Period. Full stop,” Roberts said.
He specifically apologized for a previous comment defending Carlson in which he decried a “venomous coalition” attacking the commentator. The phrase, he said, was “a terrible choice of words, especially for our Jewish colleagues and friends.”
The meeting, audio and video of which were leaked online, laid bare deep divisions inside America’s most influential conservative think tank, torn between Roberts’ attempt to mend fences and a staff revolt from within its senior ranks.
Several Heritage employees, including longtime fellows and legal scholars, told Roberts they no longer had confidence in his leadership. Others said his refusal to draw moral lines between Carlson and antisemites like Fuentes had caused lasting reputational harm.
“I made the mess, I want to clean it up,” Roberts told employees, adding that he had offered his resignation to the board but felt a “moral obligation” to stay and repair the damage.
Several staffers demanded that Roberts publicly repudiate Carlson. Two called for him to resign.
“You have shown a stunning lack of both courage and judgment,” said Amy Swearer, a senior legal fellow who has worked at Heritage for eight years. “I stand here today with no ability to say I have confidence in your leadership.”
“It has become increasingly difficult to continue to defend the Heritage Foundation,” added Rachel Greszler, another senior fellow. “I do not believe that you are the right person to lead.”
The confrontation followed days of turmoil triggered by Roberts’ decision to post a video in which he said Heritage would not “distance” itself from Carlson despite his friendly interview with Fuentes, a Holocaust denier who has praised Adolf Hitler. Roberts framed his position as a defense of “grace” and “free speech,” saying the right should avoid “canceling” its own.
That message sparked outrage across the political spectrum. Prominent Republicans, including Sen. Ted Cruz, denounced Fuentes as a “Nazi.” Jewish organizations that had partnered with Heritage on its antisemitism initiative, Project Esther, cut ties. Conservative commentators such as Ben Shapiro blasted Roberts for embracing a “no enemies to the right” ethos.
One of the most emotional moments at the meeting came during comments from Daniel Flesch, a Jewish staffer with Heritage’s Allison Center for National Security, who oversees Project Esther. He described being unable to defend Heritage to Jewish allies and friends.
“It has been six days… where as an organization we have been unable to utter the words…‘Tucker’s an antisemite, and we as Heritage do not want to associate with him,’” Daniel said. “We are bleeding trust, reputation, perhaps donors.”
Robert Rector, a Heritage veteran of 47 years, invoked conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., who in the 1960s sought to expel antisemitic and racist elements from the conservative movement.
“Buckley’s view was that we have to expunge all antisemitism from the movement and expel the lunatics,” Rector said. “This is what built the conservative movement. We are now reversing that.”
Hans von Spakovsky, another senior Heritage figure, warned Roberts that the think tank’s credibility could not be salvaged without a clean break from Carlson.
“The damage done to the reputation of Heritage is the worst I have ever seen,” von Spakovsky said. “If the Heritage Foundation and you do not dump Tucker Carlson publicly, we are not going to repair that damage.”
The meeting also exposed generational and ideological divides on the right. One young staffer argued that Heritage should not prioritize defending Israel and accused the leadership of promoting “Christian Zionism” — a comment that drew audible gasps.
Roberts and his deputies reaffirmed the foundation’s pro-Israel stance, but the exchange underscored how some younger conservatives, animated by online populism and isolationism, are challenging traditional right-wing support for Israel.
—
The post Heritage Foundation staff confront president over antisemitism, defense of Tucker Carlson appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.