Uncategorized
Speaking to Israel’s Knesset, Kevin McCarthy demurs on judicial overhaul and warns against China
(JTA) — In a landmark speech to Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, on Monday, U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy didn’t mention the judicial reform legislation dividing Israel, instead focusing on what he said was the significant threat from business dealings with China.
McCarthy’s speech and comments took place on the opening day of the Knesset’s summer session, days after the country celebrated its 75th birthday and during considerable strife in the country over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-reaching proposals to weaken Israel’s court system. Netanyahu had suspended the advance of the reforms amid sweeping protests against them, in a pause that was due to end on Monday.
During a press conference after his speech, McCarthy offered a nod toward critics of the proposed legislation who seek to preserve the courts’ independence.
“Israel is their own nation. Israel can decide what they want to do,” McCarthy said. “But I mean, having democracy — you want to have a check and balance, you want to have separation of powers.”
The speech by McCarthy, a Republican, came as he leads a bipartisan delegation to the country days after it celebrated its 75th Independence Day. It also came amid tensions between Netanyahu and Biden, a Democrat, who has not yet invited Netanyahu to the White House.
In an interview with the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom ahead of the speech, McCarthy chastised Biden for not inviting Netanyahu and said he would invite the prime minister to Washington if Biden did not.
But McCarthy was not at all partisan during his speech or afterwards, pointedly bringing the delegation of Democrats and Republicans into every photo-op. McCarthy spent more time discussing Chinese-Israeli relations, bringing tensions between Israel and the United States on the issue into public view.
“I strongly encourage Israel to further strengthen its oversight of foreign investment, particularly Chinese investment, building on the steps that you first took in 2019,” McCarthy said in his speech Monday, referring to an investment review board Israel launched that year under pressure from the Trump administration. “If we cooperate, then I’m confident we will meet the challenge and ensure a brighter future for both of our nations.”
McCarthy’s speech, the second ever by a U.S. House speaker to the Knesset, contained few surprises. He noted that Israeli pilots trained in his hometown of Bakersfield, California, before the country’s 1948 War of Independence. And he presented the Knesset with a copy of a House resolution passed overwhelmingly last week marking Israel’s 75th birthday. References to the establishment of a Palestinian state, which Netanyahu’s government opposes, were stripped out of the resolution, spurring criticism from Democrats who nonetheless voted for it.
The speaker also recommitted to fully funding current levels of defense assistance to Israel, assuaging concerns that across-the-board spending cuts passed by the House last week could affect the country.
“As long as I am speaker, America will continue to support full funding for security assistance in Israel,” he said.
And McCarthy also rejected attempts to isolate or boycott Israel, promoted peace with Israel’s Arab neighbors and called out shared rivals and enemies, especially Iran.
“We must always remain resolute in our commitment that Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon,” McCarthy said.
Netanyahu, speaking before McCarthy, also noted the Iran threat and took care to say it was a concern shared by both Republicans and Democrats.
“The first and most urgent challenge is the joint effort by Israel and the U.S. to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons,” he said. Then, referring to the Israel Defense Forces, he added, “The IDF and the U.S. Armed Forces recently completed the largest military exercise in the history of Israel and for this I would like to thank the Biden administration.”
Another issue of bipartisan concern is Israel’s growing relationship to China. McCarthy inserted his warning about Israeli-Chinese ties into the portion of his speech praising U.S.-Israel technological cooperation, an endeavor that Israel considers critical to its security infrastructure.
Israel and Netanyahu particularly have cultivated ties with China and its massive market to advance sales of Israeli technology, and to invite Chinese investment in Israeli sectors. Netanyahu has in the past highlighted his efforts to bring China and Israel into each other’s orbit.
Those efforts have appalled leaders of both parties. One of the areas of consistency between the Trump and Biden administration has been a policy of constraining Chinese influence outside of Asia, as the country seeks inroads into Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. China concerns have been exacerbated in the United States in recent months by perceptions that China is cozying up to Russia in its war against Ukraine, and fears that China may be planning a similar action against Taiwan.
“We’ve seen successes of technological cooperation in so many areas,” McCarthy said. “Today, however, our innovation is at risk from a new threat: The Chinese Communist Party. While the CCP may disguise itself as promoters of innovation, in truth they act like thieves. We must not allow them to steal our technology.”
—
The post Speaking to Israel’s Knesset, Kevin McCarthy demurs on judicial overhaul and warns against China appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
War with Iran puts the US-Israel alliance at grave risk
The Iran war is strategically sound yet politically unsupported — an unstable foundation for a gamble that could reshape the Middle East. That creates danger for Israel, which needs the support of an American public that is rapidly drifting away.
For decades, the country’s greatest strategic asset has not been its military technology or intelligence capabilities — spectacular as these are — but rather the political, diplomatic and military backing of the United States. That relationship has not been merely transactional. It was supposed to rest on shared values and deep public support across the American political spectrum.
If that support erodes or disappears, Israel’s strategic environment will fundamentally change. To be blunt: it will not be able to arm its military. This creates a paradox. A campaign that has so far demonstrated extraordinary value for the Jewish state also stands a risk of fundamentally weakening it.
An alliance at its strongest
The conflict has showcased the depth of the current U.S.–Israel alliance. To many observers, and critically to Israel’s enemies, the operation has underscored not only Israel’s capabilities but also the reality that it stands alongside the world’s most powerful state.
The strikes have projected deep into Iranian territory, revealed astonishing intelligence penetration, and destroyed or degraded key threats. Israel’s enemies across the region have already been weakened by previous rounds of fighting since Oct. 7, and the current operation has reinforced the impression that Israel can reach its adversaries wherever they operate.
Moreover, Iran’s regime has managed to isolate itself to the point where most Arab countries are in effect on the side of Israel and the U.S. That projection — of an unbreakable and strong alliance – may ultimately be the most important strategic element of this war.
But therein lies the rub.
The political foundations of American support for Israel are eroding, which means the very element that currently strengthens Israel’s deterrence — American participation — may also be the one most at risk.
A just war, unjustified
Americans do not understand why their country is at war.
A Reuters/Ipsos survey conducted at the start of the conflict found only 27% of Americans supported the U.S. action, while 43% opposed it. Other surveys show similar results, with roughly six in ten Americans against the military intervention.
In modern American history that is highly unusual. Most wars begin with a “rally around the flag” moment when public support surges. Even conflicts that later became controversial — from Afghanistan to Iraq — initially enjoyed majority backing.
This one did not — in part because the case for it has not been made clearly to the public.
That error is compounded by years of polarization in American politics; declining trust in institutions and leadership; and the record of President Donald Trump, who has spent years spreading conspiracy theories and demonstrating a remarkable indifference to factual truth. It is no exaggeration to say that many Americans do not believe a word he says – which is perhaps unprecedented.
When a president with that record launches a war, at least half the country assumes the worst. Even if the strategic logic is sound, the credibility deficit remains.
The tragedy is that the war is, in fact, eminently justifiable. The Islamic Republic has long since forfeited the moral legitimacy that normally shields states from outside force. It brutally suppresses its own population, jailing and killing protesters, policing women’s bodies, and crushing dissent with an apparatus of repression. Its foreign policy is not defensive but revolutionary. Through proxy militias it has destabilized Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, as well as the Palestinian areas, in some cases for decades.
The regime has pursued nuclear weapons through a series of transparent machinations, deceptions and brinkmanship. Negotiations have repeatedly been used as delaying tactics while enrichment continued. Any deal that relieved sanctions would not simply reduce tensions; it would also inject new resources into a system dedicated both to repression at home and aggression abroad — one that is despised by the vast majority of its own people, as murderous dictatorships inevitably will be.
There is a doctrine in international law known as the Responsibility to Protect — the principle that when a state systematically brutalizes its own population, the international community may have the right, even the obligation, to act. By that standard, the Iranian regime has been skating on thin ice for years.
But with this clear rationale left uncommunicated, the politically dangerous perception has spread that the U.S. was reacting to Israel rather than acting on its own strategic judgment.
A perilous future
If Americans come to believe that Israel caused a costly war that they did not support in the first place, the backlash could be severe.
For centuries, one of the most persistent antisemitic tropes has been the accusation that Jews manipulate powerful states into fighting wars on their behalf. The suggestion that Israel can pull the U.S. into conflict feeds directly into that mythology. Once such perceptions take hold, they can be extremely difficult to reverse.
Even people who reject antisemitism outright can absorb a softer version of the same idea: that American interests are being subordinated to Israeli ones. In a political environment already marked by growing skepticism toward Israel, that perception risks deepening the erosion of support that has been underway for years.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio seemed to inadvertently feed such notions by suggesting in recent days that the U.S. had to attack Iran because Israel was going to do so “anyway,” and then America would have been a target. It was a short path from that to conspiracy theorists like Tucker Carlson blaming Chabad for the war.
A future Democratic president, facing a base that appears to have abandoned Israel, may feel far less obligation to defend it diplomatically or militarily. Even a Republican successor could prove unreliable if the party continues its drift toward isolationism.
That likelihood is compounded by studies showing that a large part of the U.S. Jewish community itself no longer backs Zionism. That process is driven by Israel’s own policies, including the West Bank occupation and the deadly brutality of the war in Gaza.
So the very war that is showcasing the best the U.S.-Israel alliance has to offer is also at risk of fundamentally damaging that partnership. Particularly if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — the rightful object of much American ire — manipulates the Iran campaign into an electoral victory this year, the alliance’s greatest success could also be its undoing.
The post War with Iran puts the US-Israel alliance at grave risk appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Report: Iran’s New Military Plan Is Regime Survival Through Regional Escalation
Members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) attend an IRGC ground forces military drill in the Aras area, East Azerbaijan province, Iran, Oct. 17, 2022. Photo: IRGC/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
i24 News – After last year’s devastating conflict with the United States and Israel, Iranian leaders have reportedly adopted a major strategic shift aimed at expanding the war across the Middle East to secure the regime’s survival, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Previously, Iran responded to foreign strikes with limited, targeted reprisals. The new doctrine abandons that approach, aiming instead to escalate the conflict regionally, particularly against Gulf Arab states and critical economic infrastructure. The goal is to disrupt the global economy and pressure Washington into shortening the war.
This decision followed the twelve-day war with Israel in June 2025, during which Israeli and US strikes eliminated senior Iranian military leaders, destroyed key air defense systems, and severely damaged nuclear facilities. In response, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—before his elimination early in the current conflict—activated a strategy designed to maintain continuity even if top commanders were neutralized.
Central to this approach is the so-called “mosaic defense” doctrine: a decentralized military structure in which the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operates through multiple regional command centers. Each center can conduct operations independently, allowing local commanders to continue fighting even if national leadership is incapacitated. This makes the military apparatus more resilient to targeted strikes.
Analysts cited by the Wall Street Journal suggest that Tehran’s calculation is to make the conflict costly enough for all parties to force the US and its allies into a diplomatic resolution.
However, the plan carries enormous risks. By escalating attacks on regional states and international economic interests, Iran could provoke a broader coalition against itself. Despite prior military losses, Iranian forces retain the capability to launch drone and missile strikes, maintaining their influence over the ongoing conflict.
For Iranian leaders, the immediate priority remains unchanged: the survival of the regime, even if it requires a major regional escalation.
Uncategorized
Katz Warns Lebanon to Disarm Hezbollah or ‘Pay a Heavy Price’
Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz and his Greek counterpart Nikos Dendias make statements to the press, at the Ministry of Defense in Athens Greece, Jan. 20, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Louisa Gouliamaki
i24 News – Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Saturday warned Lebanon’s leadership that it must act to disarm Hezbollah and enforce existing agreements, cautioning that failure to do so could lead to severe consequences for the Lebanese state.
Speaking after a high-level security assessment with senior military officials, Katz directed a message to Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, saying Beirut had committed to enforcing an agreement requiring Hezbollah’s disarmament but had failed to follow through.
“You pledged to uphold the agreement and disarm Hezbollah — and this is not happening,” Katz said. “Act and enforce it before we do even more.”
The meeting took place in Israel’s military command center and included Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir and other senior defense officials, as Israel continues operations on multiple fronts.
Katz emphasized that Israel would not tolerate attacks on its communities or soldiers from Lebanese territory.
“We will not allow harm to our communities or to our soldiers,” he said. “If the choice is between protecting our citizens and soldiers or protecting the State of Lebanon, we will choose our citizens and soldiers — and the Lebanese government and Lebanon will pay a very heavy price.”
The defense minister also referenced Hezbollah’s leadership, warning that the group’s current chief could lead Lebanon into further destruction.
“If Hassan Nasrallah destroyed Lebanon, then Naim Qassem will destroy it as well,” Katz said.
Katz stressed that Israel has no territorial ambitions in Lebanon but said it would not accept a return to the years in which Hezbollah launched repeated attacks on Israel from Lebanese territory.
“We have no territorial claims against Lebanon,” he said. “But we will not allow Lebanese territory to again become a platform for attacks against the State of Israel.”
He concluded with a warning to Lebanese authorities to take action against Hezbollah before Israel escalates its response.
“Do and act before we do even more,” Katz said.