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
US Owners of Irish Soccer Team Fire Chair for Saying Ireland Should Not Compete Against ‘Genocidal’ Israel
Soccer Football – UEFA Nations League Draw – Brussels Expo, Brussels, Belgium – Feb.12, 2026, General view during the draw. Photo: REUTERS/Benoit Tessier
The director and co-chairperson of the professional Irish soccer club Drogheda United has been fired after saying that Ireland should not compete against Israel in the upcoming UEFA Nations League and that the Jewish state should be “banned and boycotted by all.”
The Trivela Group, the American investment firm that owns the League of Ireland team, said in a statement on Monday that Joanna Byrne was dismissed and thanked her for her “longstanding and ongoing dedication to the Club and its success.” The move came after Byrne said in February that the Football Association of Ireland (FAI) should not play their scheduled UEFA Nations League match against Israel and accused the Jewish state of committing a “genocide” against Palestinians.
Ireland was drawn to go head-to-head against Israel and will play an away game against the Jewish state on Sept. 27 before hosting the Israeli team in Dublin on Oct. 4.
“Trivela Group can confirm that, pursuant to its authority as sole shareholder of Drogheda United FC, Joanna Byrne has been removed by Trivela Group as a director of the Club,” read a statement posted on Drogheda’s website. “At this time, the Board of Directors consists of Benjamin Boycott, Marc Koretzky, Barton Lee, and club CEO Rian Wogan. Mr. Boycott for the time being, will serve as the sole Chairperson, and the club will look to appoint a local director and Co-Chair in due course.”
In a Facebook post on Monday, Byne reiterated her “strong stance” that Ireland “should not play Israel in the UEFA Nations League while a genocide against the Palestinian people continues.” She called her firing a “cold, underhand move by Trivela, initiated in the dark of the night, which was planned and coordinated without any consultation with me. This is symptomatic of the way they do business.”
“I am deeply committed to Drogheda United and want to see it flourish,” she added in part. “I will continue to elevate it, and the League of Ireland more broadly at every opportunity.”
Byrne is the Sinn Féin spokesperson on culture, communications, and sport. Drogheda United was the first League of Ireland Club to appoint a female chairperson.
In February, after the FAI confirmed that it would compete against Israel in the UEFA Nations League, Byrne released a statement denouncing the decision. She noted that the FAI submitted a motion to UEFA in November to ban Israel from its European club and international competitions.
“In November, the FAI voted to submit a motion to UEFA to ban Israel … That was the correct moral and principled position to take,” she said in February. “Therefore, I am extremely angry and dismayed that the FAI have confirmed they will play against Israel. It appears that their morals, and principled position, was only on paper – not in actions where it counts. Israel should not be in this competition.”
“UEFA should have expelled them as soon as Israel went into Gaza on a genocidal, ethnic cleansing mission that has seen tens of thousands of innocents murdered, including hundreds of sports men and women,” she added. She said Israel “should be treated the same as Apartheid South Africa was, and be banned and boycotted by all.”
Byrne also accused the UEFA of having “double standards” for banning Russia after it invaded Ukraine in 2022 but not banning Israel following its military actions in Gaza. Israel launched a military campaign against Hamas after the Palestinian terrorist group invaded southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, massacring 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages to Gaza.
“I hope the FAI knows the furor that will be coming for them from the Irish football fans – the vast vast majority will not want to see our Boys In Green in the same stadium as the Israeli team,” she said in her statement at the time. “I have said it before when I was asked about Israel’s participation in Eurovision and in other sporting fixtures and I will repeat it again now: Israel is an apartheid state who have engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide. Their behavior cannot be accepted or normalized.”
After she made the anti-Israel comments in February, Bryne claimed the board of Drogheda United said her position as chairperson of the club “was no longer tenable” because of her remarks. The board also expressed “an expectation that I would resign, something I have told them that I intend to resist,” she added.
Trivela Group confirmed last week that it issued a written instruction demanding she resign as director and co-chair of the club.
Uncategorized
Bahrain Pushes UN-Backed Action for Hormuz Shipping; France Tables Rival Text
A map showing the Strait of Hormuz is seen in this illustration taken June 22, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
UN Security Council members have begun negotiating resolutions to protect commercial shipping in and around the Strait of Hormuz, including a Bahraini draft that would authorise the use of “all necessary means” — language France has warned will be difficult to adopt.
The move underscores mounting regional concern that Iran could continue to threaten the strategic chokepoint, which carries about a fifth of global oil supplies and underpins Gulf economies.
Shipping through the waterway has already slowed to a near‑halt after Iran struck vessels amid its conflict with the United States and Israel.
Diplomats said Bahrain‘s draft, seen by Reuters and backed by other Gulf Arab states and the United States, uses diplomatic language to authorize force.
France circulated a more conciliatory alternative text, also seen by Reuters, and diplomats said talks were under way to assess whether the two drafts could be reconciled.
France‘s Foreign Minister Jean‑Noel Barrot told lawmakers that there was little certainty Bahrain‘s bid to permit the use of force — a power the Security Council can grant under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which allows measures from sanctions to military action — would win enough backing among member states. “The coming days will tell,” he said.
BAHRAINI RESOLUTION DETAILS
The Bahraini resolution describes Iran’s actions as a threat to international peace and security.
It would authorize countries — acting alone or through voluntary multinational naval coalitions — to use “all necessary means” in and around the Strait of Hormuz, including in the territorial waters of countries along its shores, to ensure passage and to prevent moves that block or interfere with international navigation.
It also expresses readiness to impose measures, including targeted sanctions.
Bahrain‘s Ambassador to France, Essam al-Jassim, told Reuters discussions were at an early stage.
“External protection has clear limits. International coalitions help secure sea lanes and stabilize markets, but their response remains largely reactive,” he earlier told a defense forum in Paris.
“They do not address, for example, escalating state-backed attacks, and without doing so, disruptions will persist.”
The Bahraini and US missions to the United Nations did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The text “demands that the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately cease all attacks against merchant and commercial vessels and any attempt to impede lawful transit passage or freedom of navigation in and around the Strait of Hormuz.”
FRENCH RESOLUTION MAKES NO MENTION OF IRAN
Diplomats said there was little prospect of such a resolution being adopted by the Security Council as Iran’s partners Russia and China were likely to veto it if necessary.
A Security Council resolution needs at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes by Russia, China, the US, Britain, and France. The Russian and Chinese missions to the United Nations were not immediately available for comment.
France on Monday submitted its own draft, taking a more conciliatory tone and aiming to build broader support within the council.
President Emmanuel Macron, who has suggested having a UN framework for any action in the Hormuz, has refused to take part in any immediate operations to secure the strait, saying that international efforts could only happen once hostilities calm, insurance and shipping firms are consulted and with Iran’s consent.
The French resolution makes no mention of Iran and is not under Chapter VII. It “urges all parties to refrain from further escalation, calls for a cessation of the ongoing hostilities in the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman, and calls for a return to the path of diplomacy.”
Rather than authorizing action, the text encourages states with an interest in commercial maritime routes in the strait to coordinate strictly defensive measures — including escorting merchant vessels — in full respect of international law, including the law of the sea.
Uncategorized
Airstrikes Target HQ, Leader of Iran-Backed Shi’ite Militia Umbrella Group in Iraq
Mourners carry the coffin of Saad al-Baiji, the Popular Mobilization Forces’ Anbar operations commander, who was killed in airstrikes that targeted a PMF site in Iraq’s western Anbar province, during his funeral, in Baghdad, Iraq, March 24, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Ahmed Saad
Airstrikes hit a headquarters of Iraq‘s umbrella group for Iran–backed Shi’ite militias and a residence belonging to its leader on Tuesday, killing at least 15 fighters in an escalation of US-Israeli strikes on one of Tehran’s main regional allies.
At least 30 other people were wounded in the strikes on a headquarters of the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq‘s Euphrates valley province of Anbar, according to medical officials who said some were in serious condition and the death toll could rise. Reuters filmed ambulances bringing the wounded to hospital in the regional capital Ramadi during the night.
The dead included the PMF’s operations commander in the province, Saad al-Baiji. Later on Tuesday, a large crowd of angry mourners carried his coffin and portraits through the streets of Baghdad.
Two security sources said the strikes had hit the PMF headquarters during a meeting attended by senior commanders.
A separate airstrike hit a residence belonging to the PMF’s leader Falih al-Fayadh in the northern city of Mosul. He was not present at the building which he uses only during visits to the city, according to the two security sources. A PMF statement said its office in the city was destroyed and one fighter wounded there.
Such damaging strikes against the PMF create political difficulty for Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al‑Sudani, who has to walk a careful line maintaining the support both of Washington and of factions in the Shi’ite-majority country that are aligned with Iran.
Sudani ordered an emergency meeting of the Ministerial Council for National Security to be convened, said a statement from the Iraqi military’s joint operations command.
The statement said the 15 PMF fighters were killed in a “US-Zionist airstrike”, the first time Iraq‘s military has blamed Israel alongside the United States for bombing the PMF.
The PMF, known in Arabic as Hashd al-Shaabi, is an umbrella group of mostly Shi’ite paramilitary factions that was formally integrated into Iraq‘s state security forces and includes several groups aligned with Iran.
Tehran-backed armed groups have launched attacks on US bases in Iraq and the US embassy since the United States and Israel launched their war on Iran on Feb. 28. Washington has had an influential presence in Baghdad since its 2003 invasion that overthrew dictator Saddam Hussein, a Sunni Muslim, and replaced him with Shi’ite-led governments friendly with Iran.
The US-Israeli war on Iran has spilled across Iran‘s borders, with Tehran launching strikes on Israel and Gulf Arab states hosting US military installations, while Israel has carried out attacks in Lebanon following cross-border fire by Iran-aligned Hezbollah.