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
White House Releases New National Security Strategy Indicating Renewed Focus on Western Hemisphere
US President Donald Trump speaks at the White House in Washington, DC, US, Sept. 25, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
The White House late on Thursday night released its new “National Security Strategy,” indicating a sharp pivot of the nation’s strategic focus toward the Western Hemisphere while recalibrating US engagement with Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.
The 33-page document only mentions Israel and the Middle East briefly, instead focusing closer to home.
“After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region,” the strategy states. “We will deny non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our Hemisphere. This ‘Trump Corollary’ to the Monroe Doctrine is a common-sense and potent restoration of American power and priorities, consistent with American security interests.”
The strategy adds that the Trump administration wants “to ensure that the Western Hemisphere remains reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the
United States; we want a Hemisphere whose governments cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organizations; we want a Hemisphere that remains free of hostile foreign incursion or ownership of key assets, and that supports critical supply chains; and we want to ensure our continued access to key strategic locations.”
Publication of the strategy came just after the results of a major new defense survey showed that the American public still overwhelmingly supports active US global leadership and robust military strength.
The White House argues in its strategy that more local challenges represent the most urgent threats to US sovereignty and domestic stability. At the same time, the document downplays the view that deep involvement in conflicts abroad advances US interests. While it reaffirms the importance of alliances and deterrence commitments, it rejects the role of Washington as “global policeman,” instead prioritizing a stronger homeland, resilient supply chains, and revitalized domestic industrial capacity. The strategy also calls for major investment in missile-defense capabilities, including a nationwide system sometimes referred to as a “Golden Dome for America,” echoing Israel’s longstanding layered defense architecture.
The White House’s strategy coincides with the release of data from the newly published Reagan National Defense Survey, which finds Americans more supportive of engagement and global leadership than many pundits have suggested. According to the findings, 64 percent of Americans want the US to be more engaged in world affairs, not less, and 87 percent believe maintaining the strongest military in the world is essential. Meanwhile, 71 percent of Americans say global peace is most likely when the US holds clear military superiority. The data also shows strong majorities support defending key allies if attacked, while 68 percent back building a national missile-defense system, reflecting rising concern about long-range threats.
For Israel and the Middle East, the White House strategy signals a recalibrated emphasis on preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, securing vital maritime chokepoints, and supporting Israel’s long-term security, including cooperation on advanced defense technologies.
Public support for the Jewish state remains strong, though there are indications of waning. Sixty-six percent of Americans view Israel as an ally, a decrease from 72 percent the year prior, according to the Reagan survey.
The survey indicates that 60 percent of Americans approved of the June 2025 US airstrike targeting Iranian nuclear infrastructure, though partisan divides remain prevalent. Enhanced pressure on Tehran, including sanctions and cyber measures, garner even broader bipartisan support.
Experts indicate that for Israel, a long-standing partner deeply affected by US posture in both Europe and the Middle East, the strategy’s emphasis on missile defense, deterrence, and countering Iranian ambitions will be particularly reassuring. However, some analysts argue that the strategy’s overall de-emphasis on the Middle East and apparent desire to be less engaged outside the Western Hemisphere could prove problematic for the Jewish state.
Uncategorized
Hamas Braces for Israeli Operations Abroad, Continued Clan Opposition in Gaza
Palestinian Hamas terrorists stand guard at a site as Hamas says it continues to search for the bodies of deceased hostages, in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, Dec. 3, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
Hamas is increasingly preparing for what it sees as an imminent Israeli attempt to assassinate senior leaders abroad, urging members to tighten personal security as the group simultaneously works to consolidate its weakened position in Gaza and reassert control over the enclave.
According to the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, Hamas officials reported rising concern over additional Israeli strikes on the Palestinian terrorist group’s top echelon abroad in the wake of last week’s killing of Hezbollah commander Haitham Tabtabai and September’s operation in Qatar targeting Hamas’s senior leadership.
Despite US “reassurance messages” to several parties — including mediators in Turkey, Qatar, and Egypt — that further strikes on senior Hamas members abroad would not be repeated, the group’s leadership says it “does not trust Israel.”
“There are expectations of a new assassination attempt with the Israeli government’s efforts to obstruct the second phase of the ceasefire agreement and its claim that the movement has no intention of advancing toward a deal,” the Palestinian terrorist group said.
Hamas members reportedly received new instructions requiring all fixed meetings at a single location to be canceled, with leaders instead holding irregular gatherings at rotating sites.
Meanwhile, the head of an armed Palestinian faction opposing Hamas in Gaza died on Thursday while mediating an internal dispute between families and groups within the militia, dealing a setback to Israeli efforts to support Gazan clans against the ruling Islamist group.
Yasser Abu Shabab, a Bedouin tribal leader based in Israeli-held Rafah in southern Gaza, had led one of the most prominent of several small anti-Hamas groups that emerged in the enclave during the war that began more than two years ago.
Following the incident, Hamas said in a statement that the fate of anyone who “betrayed their people and homeland and agreed to be an instrument in the hands of the occupation [Israel]” was inevitable, accusing Abu Shabab of “criminal acts” that amounted to a “flagrant deviation from national and social consensus.”
Abu Shabab’s death would be a boost to Hamas, which has branded him a collaborator and ordered its fighters to kill or capture him.
“The occupation that could not protect its own agents will be unable to protect any of its collaborators, and anyone who undermines the security of their people and serves their enemy is destined to fall into the dustbin of history, losing all respect and standing in society,” the terrorist group said in its statement.
Gaza’s Popular Forces confirmed that its leader died of a gunshot wound as he intervened in a family quarrel, and dismissed as “misleading” reports that Hamas was behind Abu Shabab’s killing.
Ghassan al-Dahini, who could assume leadership of the group following the incident, pledged to continue Abu Shabab’s project and resist Hamas by establishing an alternative to the terrorist group’s rule.
“With God’s help, and following my brother Yasser’s plan, we will return as we were — more determined and stronger,” al-Dahini said in a statement, according to Hebrew media. “We will keep fighting with every last ounce of strength until every final terrorist is gone.”
“Today, Hamas will see its true face — the one the world should have recognized long ago. We will restore hope to all Palestinians, to all free people, to the oppressed, and to everyone who believes in peace,” he continued.
Rafah has been the scene of some of the worst violence during the ceasefire, with residents reporting gunbattles on Wednesday that left four Israeli soldiers wounded. On Thursday, the Israeli military said its forces killed about 40 Hamas fighters trapped in tunnels beneath the city.
Shortly after the US-backed ceasefire to halt fighting in Gaza took effect in October, Hamas moved to reassert control over the war-torn enclave and consolidate its weakened position by targeting Palestinians who it labeled as “lawbreakers and collaborators with Israel.”
Since then, Hamas’s brutal crackdown has escalated dramatically, sparking widespread clashes and violence as the group moves to seize weapons and eliminate any opposition.
Social media videos widely circulated online show Hamas members brutally beating Palestinians and carrying out public executions of alleged collaborators and rival militia members.
Uncategorized
Palestinian Official Calls Drop Site News Founder an ‘Apologist’ for Hamas, Ex-Obama Aides Say They ‘Love’ the Site
Abdal Karim Ewaida, the Palestinian ambassador to Côte d’Ivoire, in October 2023. Photo: Screenshot
A Palestinian diplomat accused a popular new anti-Israel website of running cover and acting as an apologist for Hamas.
Abdal Karim Ewaida, the Palestinian ambassador to Côte d’Ivoire, posted on social media about Drop Site News on Tuesday, after the website reported that the Palestinian Authority was planning to ban Hamas and other terrorist factions from running in future elections.
“Pro-resistance parties and armed resistance remains one of the single most popular points in [Palestinian] public polling,” said Jeremy Scahill, founder of Drop Site News. “The Palestinian Authority is saying, ‘You are not allowed to run for public office anymore.’ And when you look at what the defense of this is on the part of the Palestinian Authority, it is a pathetic defense.”
In response, Ewaida lambasted Scahill in a social media post.
“As for Jeremy Scahill — a journalist who transitions between outlets, perhaps pursuing higher remuneration — he consistently excuses Hamas and [Yahya] Sinwar’s purported interest in reconciliation solely to vilify the Palestinian National Authority and President Mahmoud Abbas. It is astounding,” the Palestinian official wrote.
Sinwar, who was killed by Israeli forces last year, was the leader of Hamas and mastermind of the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.
“He acts as a fervent apologist for Hamas and jihadist elements,” Ewaida continued, referring to Scahill, “even to the point of rationalizing [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s claims of financially bolstering Hamas as being in Israel’s interest, while attempting to spin it as favorable to Hamas itself. He seems to believe he can speak with impunity.”
Ewaida went on to castigate Drop Site News in general, saying that the “platform’s credibility is deeply compromised. We are acutely aware of its sources of funding and underlying motives. The day will come when your malicious objectives and relentless advocacy for Hamas — now apparent to all — will be fully exposed, leaving little doubt about your benefactors.”
Let me be clear from the outset: I represent the State of Palestine as its ambassador, not the Palestinian Authority as an envoy—a distinction that stands regardless of opinion.
Secondly, your platform’s credibility is deeply compromised. We are acutely aware of its sources of… https://t.co/E6Ym43wWL0
— Ambassadeur Abdal Karim Ewaida (@KarimEwaida) December 3, 2025
One day after Ewaida’s post, the hosts of the influential progressive podcast “Pod Save America” — all one-time aides to former US President Barack Obama — mentioned Drop Site News, saying “we love you guys” and “we are readers.”
The two hosts that were part of that conversation, Ben Rhodes and Tommy Vietor, served as speechwriter and spokesman, respectively, for Obama in the White House, focusing on national security issues.
In a follow-up to the episode, the Drop Site News posted on its X account “Pod Save the World = confirmed Drop Site readers,” and Rhodes responded, “yes readers.”
Good correction! And yes readers.
— Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) December 3, 2025
Many former Obama staffers have become vocally critical of Israel in recent years, especially amid the war in Gaza. However, Rhodes’s views on Israel were particularly critical at the time they were serving in government as well, so much so that during the Obama administration, he earned himself the nickname “Hamas” in the White House. The nickname was coined by Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, as Rhodes revealed in his memoir, The World as It Is.