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
Man arrested over alleged firebomb plot targeting pro-Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani
(JTA) — A New Jersey man was arrested on Thursday for allegedly plotting to firebomb the home of the prominent pro-Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani.
Alexander Heifler, 26, was arrested by authorities in Hoboken after a weeks-long undercover operation led by the New York City Police Department revealed that he allegedly planned to throw a dozen Molotov cocktails at Kiswani’s residence.
The investigation into Heifler began in early February when Heifler discussed using Molotov cocktails on a group video call that included an undercover law enforcement officer, according to a criminal complaint filed in the U.S. District Court of New Jersey.
He later told the undercover officer that he had planned to flee the country following the attack. (The criminal complaint did not specify the name of the group or the country he planned to flee to.)
During a search of Heifler’s home Thursday night, detectives and FBI agents uncovered eight Molotov cocktails. He has been charged with unlawful possession of firearms and making of destructive devices.
In a statement Friday, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said that Heifler was an alleged member of the Jewish Defense League, a far-right pro-Israel group that the has FBI labeled as a terrorist organization since 2001, and that the country he had planned to flee to was Israel.
“Last night, an alleged member of the Jewish Defense League — designated by the FBI as a ‘known violent extremist organization’ — attempted to blow up the home of Nerdeen Kiswani in a chilling act of political violence and an apparent assassination plot,” the statement read. “The defendant allegedly planned to flee to Israel following the attack. This comes amidst an alarming rise in threats and violence across the country targeting Palestinian human rights advocates.”
“Let me be clear: We will not tolerate violent extremism in our city. No one should face violence for their political beliefs or their advocacy. I am relieved that Nerdeen is safe,” the statement continued.
A police official confirmed that Heifler was a member of a branch of the Jewish Defense League on Friday, according to The New York Times.
Last month, Kiswani, who has long drawn accusations of antisemitism for her rhetoric on Zionists, sued Betar USA, a far-right militant pro-Israel group, accusing the group of violating her civil rights by putting out social media “bounties” on her and repeatedly harassing her. (In January, Betar USA agreed to dissolve its New York operations following a settlement with the state attorney general.)
The activist has also been singled out by far-right Florida Jewish Rep. Randy Fine, who reposted a tweet of Kiswani’s last month to make disparaging remarks about Muslims which sparked calls for his censure.
In a post on X, Kiswani, a Palestinian-American who co-founded the hardline pro-Palestinian group Within Our Lifetime, wrote that she had been informed by the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force on Thursday night that “a plot against my life that was ‘about to’ take place.”
“For months, Zionist organizations like Betar and politicians like Randy Fine have encouraged violence against my family and me,” Kiswani continued. “I will have more to say as additional details come to light. I will not stop speaking up for the people of Palestine. Thank you for your support.”
In response to The New York Times’ post about the arrest, Betar USA wrote that it was “not surprising if other terrorists targeted her.”
“Violent terrorist Nerdeen Kiswani wants to globalize the intifada not surprising if other terrorists targeted her. Palestinians have always targeted one another,” the group posted on X alongside a video of Kiswani’s rhetoric. “Not surprising given the violent nature of these people who have globalized the intifada.”
The announcement of the arrest drew praise from the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, which wrote in a post on X that there is “absolutely no place in our city for violence, threats, or attempts to take someone’s life—ever.”
“While we adamantly disagree with Nerdeen Kiswani’s inflammatory rhetoric and her organization’s tactics, we condemn in the strongest possible terms the reported plot against her,” the group said.
Brad Hoylman Sigal, the Jewish Manhattan borough president, also praised the NYPD for the arrest in a post on X.
“Grateful to @NYPDnews for their swift work in preventing this horrific plot against Nerdeen Kiswani,” Sigal wrote. “Political violence, against anyone, for any reason, has no place in our city.”
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Man arrested over alleged firebomb plot targeting pro-Palestinian activist Nerdeen Kiswani appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The moral degradation of Israel’s far-right is even worse than you think
This week, an Israeli Knesset member said something that should have been shocking, horrifying and unanimously condemned.
“I stand behind IDF soldiers in every situation,” said Yitzhak Kroizer, a member of the ultranationalist Otzmah Yehudit Party. Even if the “collateral damage is children or women — it does not matter to me.”
“In Jenin, there are no innocent civilians,” he added. “In Jenin, there are no innocent children.”
Kroizer was referring to a genuine tragedy: The killing of almost an entire Palestinian family by Israel undercover forces on March 15, near the village of Tammun. The forces opened fire on the family’s car as they returned from a shopping trip. Waed Bani Ohde, her husband Ali, and two of their young children Othman, 7, and Mohammed, 5, were killed. Two sons survived. The army says the car accelerated toward the forces; Palestinian witnesses say the IDF gave no warning before attacking.
It is tempting to dismiss statements like Kroizer’s as the rhetoric of the extreme. Indeed, I often find myself making that point when talking to people inclined to think the worst of Israel: They do not represent the majority, and not even the immoral government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
But that, while true, is becoming a little too pat.
For it is also true that as time goes, as the wars continue and hearts harden, what Kroizer articulated is a moral framework that is steadily taking hold in the Israeli right.
That’s why the statements were not condemned by anyone associated with the government. And, indeed, Israeli far-right activists responded to the deaths with social media posts rejoicing in the death of the unarmed “terrorists.”
No senior Israeli official apologized for the shooting. No one said publicly that even if the soldiers believed they were acting under threat, the killing of two children demands something more than a routine internal review.
No official has even conceded that this type of event might contribute to agitation and instability in the West Bank, and perhaps spark another uprising. Set empathy aside; even enlightened self-interest is beyond the current Israeli government.
Yes, an investigation has been opened. But military investigations almost never lead to concrete action against the troops. A Guardian report this week revealed that no Israeli citizen has been prosecuted for a killing in the West Bank since 2020, despite a radical uptick in violence; settlers and police have already killed 10 Palestinian civilians this month alone.
The undercover soldiers, especially, are something like the real life version of the international hit Fauda, widely admired for their counter-terrorism activity. There is little appetite for throwing the book at them.
So while it’s tempting to chalk this up as just another tragedy in a long list of tragedies on both sides, it is actually much more: a devastating manifestation of something fundamental — not just a personal tragedy but a national one.
That’s a tragedy I’ve seen unfolding slowly, since even before the Hamas attack of Oct. 7, 2023.
I’ve seen it in the rhetoric of far-right leaders like cabinet ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. But I’ve also seen it firsthand, as when I found myself on wartime television panels where I was besieged by right-wingers enraged at my assertion that innocents have been killed during the war in Gaza. I challenged one of them about whether this idea would include a two-week old baby.
“OK, maybe not the baby!” he conceded, unhappily.
The descent of part of Israeli society into this unforgivable lack of compassion is, some have argued, an inevitable outcome of indefinite control over the Palestinian territories. For years, warnings that rule over millions of disenfranchised Arabs would mutate Israel’s character were treated as excessive, even hysterical.
Israel was not a colonial power in the classic sense, its defenders argued; it was a democracy under siege, navigating impossible dilemmas. The West Bank may be “occupied” but that was justifiable because of the threat its near proximity posed. Israel’s actions might be harsh, but they were necessary, the argument went. It was said that the country’s moral core, despite pressures, would remain intact.
The initial signs after this latest tragedy are not exactly reassuring. Far from condemning Kroizer, as they rightly should have, the cabinet convened this week to offer his party a great gift: the legalization of 30 illegal settlement outposts, including some in “Area A,” which is supposed to be under full Palestinian control.
Israel did not begin this way. Its founding story was deeply bound up with an acute awareness of the need to maintain morality. The early Zionists envisioned a country that would be a “light unto the nations.”
As occupation has become an entrenched reality, most Israelis have wanted to look away; the problem is too complicated. This position may not be possible for much longer. The moral rot is too extreme. But the good news is that it has not infected everything and everyone. Israel’s public broadcaster devoted a segment to the Palestinian family’s tragedy, characterizing Kroizer’s statements as a disgrace.
The humanistic ideas through which Israel once judged itself have eroded. We must now hope that they won’t entirely vanish.
The post The moral degradation of Israel’s far-right is even worse than you think appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Rubio Says Iran War to Last ‘Weeks Not Months,’ No US Ground Troops Needed
A view of a residential building damaged by a strike, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 23, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
The US expects its operation against Iran to conclude within weeks, not months, and Washington can meet all its objectives without using ground troops, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Friday.
Rubio told reporters after meeting G7 counterparts in France that Washington was “on or ahead of schedule in that operation, and expect to conclude it at the appropriate time here – a matter of weeks, not months.”
While he said Washington could achieve its aims without ground troops, he acknowledged it was deploying some to the region “to give the president maximum optionality and maximum opportunity to adjust the contingencies, should they emerge.”
Washington has dispatched two contingents of thousands of Marines to the region, the first of which is due to arrive around the end of March aboard a huge amphibious assault ship. The Pentagon is also expected to deploy thousands of elite airborne soldiers.
The deployments have raised concerns that the war, which the US and Israel launched on Feb. 28 with airstrikes that killed Iran‘s supreme leader and other top officials, could turn into a prolonged ground battle. Iran‘s response, striking US and Israeli targets in the region as well as civilian targets in Gulf Arab nations and shipping, has severely disrupted global trade in energy and other commodities, raising fears of rising prices and recession.
US President Donald Trump has appeared anxious to wind down the unpopular war, and emphasized this week what he has described as productive negotiations aimed at a diplomatic solution to the war, despite repeated assertions from Tehran that no such talks have begun. On Thursday, Trump extended a deadline by 10 days for Iran to reopen the blockaded Strait of Hormuz or face attacks against its civilian energy grid.
Rubio discussed with G7 foreign ministers the possibility that Iran, even after the conflict ends, could try to impose shipping tolls through the Strait of Hormuz. Rubio said European and Asian countries that benefit from trade through the waterway should contribute to efforts to secure free passage through the strait, downplaying the US dependence on the trade.
NEW STRIKES ON IRAN
Iranian media reported strikes on Iran‘s decommissioned heavy-water nuclear research reactor and a factory producing yellowcake uranium late on Friday, and said there were no radiation leaks or danger arising from either attack. Iran informed the International Atomic Energy Agency there was no increase in off-site radiation levels at the yellowcake facility, the IAEA said on X, adding that it would look into the report.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on X that Israel, in coordination with the US, had also hit two steel factories and a power plant. “Attack contradicts POTUS extended deadline for diplomacy. Iran will exact HEAVY price for Israeli crimes,” Araqchi said, using an acronym for the president.
A senior Iranian told Reuters that Tehran had not decided whether to respond to a 15-point proposal the US sent this week after attacks on industrial and nuclear infrastructure on Friday. The official said Iran had expected its response to be delivered on Friday or Saturday, but said the continuing strikes while the US was seeking talks was “intolerable.”
The US proposal, sent via Pakistan two days ago, is reported to include demands ranging from dismantling Iran‘s nuclear and missile programs to relinquishing control of the world’s most important trade route for energy supplies.
The war has spread across the Middle East, killing thousands of people and causing a major disruption to energy supplies, hitting the global economy with soaring oil, gas, and fertilizer prices that have fueled inflation fears.
In Iran, more than 1,900 people have been killed and at least 20,000 injured, said Maria Martinez of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
Attacks on Israel by Iran‘s Lebanese ally Hezbollah have also prompted an Israeli campaign that has displaced a fifth of Lebanon’s population.
IRAN STILL POSSESSES MISSILES
The United States, which has set out to neutralize Iran‘s long-range strike capabilities, can only confirm that about a third of the country’s missile arsenal has been destroyed, five people familiar with the US intelligence told Reuters.
As the damage mounts, Gulf Arab states are telling the US that any deal must not merely end the war but also permanently curb Iran‘s missile and drone capabilities and ensure global energy supplies are never again weaponized, four Gulf sources said.
Far from being laid low, Iran‘s clerical rulers and the increasingly powerful Guards are still peppering the region with airstrikes, driving up energy prices and roiling financial markets.
While a third of Iran‘s missile stock may still be available for use, another third is likely to be damaged or buried in tunnels, some of which could be recovered once fighting stops, said four of the sources familiar with US intelligence, who asked to remain anonymous.
One source said the intelligence on Iran‘s drone capability was similar, with about a third most likely destroyed.
Stock markets continued their slide on Friday, while the Brent crude oil benchmark topped $112, having risen more than 50% since the war began.
In the US. where Trump is politically vulnerable to rising fuel prices, diesel in California hit an all-time high at an average $7.17 a gallon, the American Automobile Association said.