RSS
The Solution to Israel’s Political and Judicial Discord Runs Through Each of Us
A general view shows the plenum at the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
In the midst of Israel’s ongoing political and judicial tensions, each side has become increasingly convinced that the other represents an existential threat to the nation we all love. The right fears that judicial overreach is undermining democratic will; the left fears democratic erosion and the loss of crucial checks and balances. Both sides believe they are fighting to save Israel, yet it is this polarization itself that poses, perhaps, the greatest danger to our collective future.
The question we must all ask ourselves, as honestly as possible, is deceptively simple but deeply challenging: How do I know whether I am part of the problem or part of the solution?
Years ago, while lecturing in America during the Obama administration, I proposed a litmus test: If you cannot name three positive aspects of the opposing political perspective, there is a high probability that, regardless of whether your position is factually correct, you are contributing to the problem rather than helping solve it.
This insight traces back to the Garden of Eden. According to Maimonides’ interpretation of Genesis, humanity’s original sin was essentially subjectivity, confusing what feels good with what is good, and what feels bad with what is bad. Once trapped in this subjective bubble, we convince ourselves that those we dislike do only wrong, while those we admire do only right. The human mind becomes an exceptional attorney, skillfully marshaling evidence to support our predetermined conclusions while dismissing contradictory facts.
This pattern repeats across contexts: in marriages heading toward divorce, in fragmenting communities, and in nations tearing themselves apart politically. If you cannot engage in self-criticism while acknowledging something positive about your opponents, you usually have become part of the destructive cycle.
After proposing this test during my American lecture, an audience member immediately responded, “I completely agree, I wish the Democrats understood that.” I just paused, and after letting her statement sink in, I responded, “Okay, can you say three good things about Barack Obama?” And she said, “Sure.” I said, “Go on.” And she paused, for a long while until she finally said, “He’s a good family man.” I said, “No, can you tell me anything about his policies or his politics?” She was stuck. I told her, “I’m not blaming you, but the statistical likelihood that all the good is on one side and all the problems are on the other side is statistically zero.” The same holds true for us here in Israel, and in every polarized society. The statistical probability that all wisdom and virtue reside on one side of a complex political divide — while all error and vice occupy the other — is effectively zero.
Israel’s situation demands this same honest self-reflection. Our judicial reform debates have exposed deep fault lines in Israeli society, with each side viewing the other through lenses clouded by fear and anger. These emotions, while natural, distort our perception and impair our judgment.
The healing of our nation begins with individual responsibility. We must learn to see the world through the eyes of other — not necessarily to agree with them, but to understand why reasonable, ethical people might hold views diametrically opposed to our own. Often, we discover that others share our fundamental concerns, but approach them from different angles.
Half the country did not suddenly decide to embrace evil. Whether left-wing or right-wing, our leaders’ rhetoric responds to and amplifies genuine worries felt by large segments of the population. If you cannot recognize the legitimacy of concerns on both sides, you are contributing to our national discord rather than its resolution.
The Torah teaches us that before we can repair the world, we must first repair ourselves. Israel’s healing will emerge first through individual transformation, then through small community dialogues, and only then will our national leadership respond to this grassroots change. Our leaders reflect our divisions because we, the people, remain divided.
This approach requires tremendous courage. It means questioning our certainties, acknowledging our biases, and recognizing that wisdom rarely belongs exclusively to any single perspective. It means being willing to say, “Perhaps I don’t have all the answers. Perhaps I need to listen more and judge less.”
The path forward for Israel requires us to move beyond seeing political opponents as enemies and instead recognize them as partners in a shared national project, even when we profoundly disagree. Our strength has always come from our diversity of thought and our capacity for vigorous debate within a framework of mutual respect and common purpose.
The solution to Israel’s discord runs through each of us individually as well as collectively. It begins when we look in the mirror and acknowledge our own contributions to the problem. It continues as we build bridges across divides, listen with genuine curiosity rather than waiting to respond, and seek understanding before demanding agreement.
Only then can we transform this period of conflict into an opportunity for growth and emerge as a stronger, more united Israel, not through imposed uniformity of thought, but through a richer, more nuanced appreciation of our shared destiny and diverse perspectives.
Rabbi Daniel Rowe currently serves as the Educational Visionary of Aish, a global Jewish educational institution, and resides in Jerusalem. He is originally from Manchester, UK, and is writing several books as well as his doctoral thesis on the Philosophy of Mathematics. Rabbi Rowe studied for almost a decade in Israel in various Talmudic institutes. Rabbi Rowe is known for his ability to tackle difficult topics and has numerous videos and articles online. He is an expert on Jewish and Muslim history and has given several talks on the subject of the Judeo-Muslim dynamic and interactions in the modern world.
The post The Solution to Israel’s Political and Judicial Discord Runs Through Each of Us first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Links $1.9 Billion in State Disaster Funds to Israel Boycott Stance
A resident enters a FEMA’s improvised station to attend claims by local residents affected by floods following the passing of Hurricane Helene, in Marion, North Carolina, US, Oct. 5, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
US states and cities that boycott Israeli companies will be denied federal aid for natural disaster preparedness, the Trump administration has announced, tying routine federal funding to its political stance.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency stated in grant notices posted on Friday that states must follow its “terms and conditions.” Those conditions require they certify they will not sever “commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies” to qualify for funding.
The requirement applies to at least $1.9 billion that states rely on to cover search-and-rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries, and backup power systems among other expenses, according to 11 agency grant notices reviewed by Reuters.
The requirement is the Trump administration’s latest effort to use federal funding to promote its views on Israel.
The Department of Homeland Security, the agency that oversees FEMA, in April said that boycotting Israel is prohibited for states and cities receiving its grant funds.
FEMA separately said in July that US states will be required to spend part of their federal terrorism prevention funds on helping the government arrest migrants, an administration priority.
The Israel requirement takes aim at BDS, the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement designed to isolate the world’s lone Jewish state on the international stage as a step toward its eventual elimination.
“DHS will enforce all antidiscrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism,” a spokesperson for Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said in a statement.
The requirement is largely symbolic. At least 34 states already have anti-BDS laws or policies, according to a University of Pennsylvania law journal. The BDS movement did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The American Jewish Committee supports the Trump administration’s policy, said Holly Huffnagle, the group’s director of antisemitism policy. The AJC is an advocacy group that supports Israel.
Under one of the grant notices posted on Friday, FEMA will require major cities to agree to the Israel policy to receive a cut of $553.5 million set aside to prevent terrorism in dense areas.
New York is due to receive $92.2 million from the program, the most of all the recipients. Allocations are based on the agency’s analysis of “relative risk of terrorism,” according to the notice.
RSS
Iran Sets Up New Defense Council in Wake of War With Israel
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian speaks during a meeting in Ilam, Iran, June 12, 2025. Photo: Iran’s Presidential website/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
Iran‘s top security body approved the establishment of a National Defenxe Council on Sunday, according to state media, following a short air war with Israel in June that was Iran‘s most acute military challenge since the 1980s war with Iraq.
“The new defense body will review defense plans and enhance the capabilities of Iran‘s armed forces in a centralized manner,” the Supreme National Security Council‘s Secretariat was quoted as saying by state media.
The defense council will be chaired by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, and consists of the heads of the three government branches, senior armed forces commanders, and relevant ministries.
On Sunday, the commander-in-chief of Iran‘s military, Amir Hatami, warned that threats from Israel persist and should not be underestimated.
RSS
Israel to Decide Next Steps in Gaza After Ceasefire Talks Collapse
Smoke rises from Gaza as the sun sets, as seen from the Israeli side of the Israel-Gaza border. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will convene his security cabinet this week to decide on Israel‘s next steps in Gaza following the collapse of indirect ceasefire talks with Hamas, with one senior Israeli source suggesting more force could be an option.
Last Saturday, during a visit to the country, US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff had said he was working with the Israeli government on a plan that would effectively end the war in Gaza.
But Israeli officials have also floated ideas including expanding the military offensive in Gaza and annexing parts of the shattered enclave.
The failed ceasefire talks in Doha had aimed to clinch agreements on a US-backed proposal for a 60-day truce, during which aid would be flown into Gaza and half of the hostages Hamas is holding would be freed in exchange for Palestinian prisoners jailed in Israel.
After Netanyahu met Witkoff last Thursday, a senior Israeli official said that “an understanding was emerging between Washington and Israel,” of a need to shift from a truce to a comprehensive deal that would “release all the hostages, disarm Hamas, and demilitarize the Gaza Strip,” – Israel‘s key conditions for ending the war.
A source familiar with the matter told Reuters on Sunday that the envoy’s visit was seen in Israel as “very significant.”
But later on Sunday, the Israeli official signaled that pursuit of a deal would be pointless, threatening more force: “An understanding is emerging that Hamas is not interested in a deal and therefore the prime minister is pushing to release the hostages while pressing for military defeat.”
“STRATEGIC CLARITY”
What a “military defeat” might mean, however, is up for debate within the Israeli leadership. Some Israeli officials have suggested that Israel might declare it was annexing parts of Gaza as a means to pressure the Palestinian terrorist group, which has ruled the enclave for nearly two decades.
Others, like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir want to see Israel impose military rule in Gaza before annexing it and re-establishing the Jewish settlements Israel evicted 20 years ago.
The Israeli military, which has pushed back at such ideas throughout the war, was expected on Tuesday to present alternatives that include extending into areas of Gaza where it has not yet operated, according to two defense officials.
While some in the political leadership are pushing for expanding the offensive, the military is concerned that doing so will endanger the 20 hostages who are still alive, the officials said.
Israeli Army Radio reported on Monday that military chief Eyal Zamir has become increasingly frustrated with what he describes as a lack of strategic clarity by the political leadership, concerned about being dragged into a war of attrition with Hamas terrorists.
A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) declined to comment on the report but said that the military has plans in store.
“We have different ways to fight the terror organization, and that’s what the army does,” Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said.
On Tuesday, Qatar and Egypt endorsed a declaration by France and Saudi Arabia outlining steps toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which included a call on Hamas to hand over its arms to the Western-backed Palestinian Authority.
Hamas has repeatedly said it won’t lay down arms. But it has told mediators it was willing to quit governance in Gaza for a non-partisan ruling body, according to three Hamas officials.
It insists that the post-war Gaza arrangement must be agreed upon among the Palestinians themselves and not dictated by foreign powers.
Israel‘s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar suggested on Monday that the gaps were still too wide to bridge.
“We would like to have all our hostages back. We would like to see the end of this war. We always prefer to get there by diplomatic means, if possible. But of course, the big question is, what will be the conditions for the end of the war?” he told journalists in Jerusalem.