Connect with us

RSS

Will Biden Act Against Israel During the Lame-Duck Period?

US President Joe Biden meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC, July 25, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

JNS.org – The final two months of the Biden administration may see diplomatic actions taken against Israel, although the White House has neither confirmed nor denied assessments on the issue.

One scenario could see the administration consider approving a United Nations Security Council resolution that would target Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria, reminiscent of Resolution 2334 passed in 2016 during the Obama administration’s transition period.

A report by Israel Hayom on Tuesday cited an American source close to the Biden administration as stating that the United States intends to endorse such a resolution, adding that the proposed resolution aims to assert that Israel’s presence in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, including the Old City, violates international law.

The source emphasized the parallels to Resolution 2334, which the Security Council approved during the transition period between the Obama and Trump administrations in December 2016. “Many of Obama’s advisers back then are also serving in Biden’s outgoing administration,” the report said, citing the source as stating, “I know that such a decision is brewing in the [U.S.] National Security Council.”

In response to inquiries, a senior Israeli official said Jerusalem currently has “no information” about an American intention to pass a resolution against Israel at the U.N., according to the report, which added, however, that “according to the assessment, eventually, such a decision will likely come.”

Adding to the concerns, Professor Eytan Gilboa, an expert on US-Israeli relations at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan and a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, discussed possible scenarios on Tuesday. Gilboa recalled the unusual step taken by President Barack Obama when he allowed the passage of Resolution 2334.

“Obama broke the tradition where an outgoing president doesn’t initiate significant new policies during the transition,” Gilboa told JNS. “He knew Trump’s position on settlements but still submitted the proposal to the Security Council.”

Gilboa added that “if Biden goes through with this, it’s essentially a repeat of Obama’s move. It might be aimed at negating [former Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo’s declaration in November 2019, which nullified Obama’s policy on settlements.”

The professor highlighted possible motivations behind such a move, it could be an attempt by Biden to leave a legacy opposing Trump’s stance on Judea and Samaria.

Gilboa questioned the rationale behind introducing a resolution now, adding, “If they do this, they’ll face severe criticism from Trump and the Republican-led Congress. It would be an unusual step during a transition period.”

Gilboa added that “this administration has previously imposed personal sanctions on individuals, including hilltop youths. They even considered sanctioning [Israeli Ministers Betzalel] Smotrich and [Itamar] Ben-Gvir. As such, I would not be surprised if they are considering such a step. If it goes ahead, it would appear to be some sort of punishment.”

Looking ahead, Gilboa suggested that Israel needs to engage in proactive diplomacy. “Israel should argue that such moves will only hinder any potential peace arrangements, like the Abraham Accords. It’s like putting a stoke in the wheel. If Biden proceeds with this, it will backfire.”

In such a scenario, he added, Israel would likely turn to the incoming Trump administration, which would issue an opposite declaration, similar to the declaration made by Pompeo in November 2019, who stated at the time a change in Washington’s policy on settlements. “Calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law hasn’t worked. It hasn’t advanced the cause of peace,” Pompeo said.

Certain arms transfers

Meanwhile, indications continue to surface of ongoing punitive measures that have been underway in the form of withholding or delaying weapons deliveries. The Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) released an update on Tuesday concerning U.S. military assistance to Israel since Oct. 7, 2023. It notes that “eight platforms have either been slowed, suspended or left unanswered.

“Recent US decisions to withhold certain arms transfers to Israel, resume others, and the inconsistent reporting around those decisions highlight the challenges of accounting for vital resupplies to help Israel wage an unexpected, prolonged, multifront, munitions-intensive conflict,” JINSA reported.

JINSA has produced an infographic detailing US military assistance to Israel since Oct. 7, including withheld supplies. “The information presented is based on public reporting and JINSA discussions with officials knowledgeable of the arms transfers. Because arms deliveries are not publicly disclosed, it is difficult to assess exactly which supplies the United States agreed to send since October 7, versus sales that were contracted before that date and delivered afterward—nor is this list likely to be exhaustive, given backlogged and incomplete reporting of agreed arms transfers by the Pentagon,” it stated.

Under the “transfer reportedly slowed” category, the infographic mentioned Hellfire missiles and precision guided munitions, D9 armored bulldozers and tank ammunition.

At the same time, the US has provided at least $17.9 billion in support of Israeli military operations against Hamas since the Oct. 7, 2023, mass murder attacks, according to research released last month by Brown University. This includes deliveries of artillery shells, air defense munitions, precision-guided munitions and heavy bombs.

On Nov. 17, Marc Dubowitz, chief executive of the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and Eugene Kontorovich, a professor of law at George Mason University in Virginia, stated in a joint op-ed in the New York Post, “Under pressure from Israel-bashing critics, including scores of congressional Democrats, a president who stood firmly behind Israel after the Oct. 7 massacre seems to have lost his moral compass. And just as President Barack Obama in his last months in office allowed the UN Security Council to pass a resolution slamming Israel, Biden may use sanctions to further turn the screws on the Jewish state in his lame-duck stretch.”

They highlighted that in 2022, the US Treasury Department “determined that the Foundation for Global Political Exchange, a U.S.-based nonprofit, would violate sanctions laws by inviting Hamas and Hezbollah to a conference it was planning in Beirut. Last week, however, the Biden administration did an about-face and gave the group a green light for the meeting.”

Dubowitz and Kontorovich added, “Yet at the same time, the Biden administration has created the first sanctions program” designed to target citizens of Israel.

In the broader context, the reported actions reflect internal pressures within the Democratic Party and the Biden administration’s attempts to navigate between progressive elements and traditional foreign policy stances. Gilboa observed, “Perhaps this is Biden’s way of appeasing the progressive wing after facing criticism for his support of Israel during the recent conflict.”

The post Will Biden Act Against Israel During the Lame-Duck Period? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 350
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

Mounting Evidence Reveals Al Jazeera ‘Journalist’ Anas Al-Sharif’s Extensive Hamas Ties

Journalists and media workers protest after Al-Jazeera personnel killed in Gaza, in Barcelona, Spain, Aug. 13, 2025. Photo: Marc Asensio/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect

Evidence has emerged that Anas al-Sharif, one of Al Jazeera Arabic’s most prominent correspondents in Gaza, may have operated as a political operative for Hamas prior to and during the Palestinian terrorist group’s ongoing war with Israel.

Records and public footage indicate al-Sharif worked on a Hamas-linked media team before joining Al Jazeera, maintained ties with senior Hamas leadership, and was singled out by anti-Hamas protesters in March 2025 as part of the group’s ruling establishment.

The Israel Defense Forces claimed that al-Sharif, who was killed on Aug. 10 along with four colleagues in an Israeli airstrike near Gaza City’s al-Shifa Hospital, was “the head of a Hamas terrorist cell and advanced rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and IDF troops.” IDF international spokesman Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani added on X that Israel obtained intelligence showing al-Sharif was “an active Hamas military wing operative at the time of his elimination” and even received a salary from the terrorist group.

The IDF released photographs it said showed him with Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Khalil al-Hayya, and others, as well as a guest at Hamas gatherings, including some before his current rise to prominence since 2023.

The BBC noted that al-Sharif had worked directly on a Hamas-affiliated media team before the war. This background helped position him to become one of Al Jazeera’s most recognizable Gaza correspondents, ultimately earning him the moniker “The Voice of Gaza” on the network.

According to recently surfaced court documents, al-Sharif allegedly praised Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, the day the terrorist group invaded southern Israel, killed 1,200 people, and kidnapped 251 hostages while perpetrating widespread sexual violence.

“Nine hours and the heroes [of Hamas’s Qassam Brigades and other fighters] are still roaming through the houses [of Israelis] killing and capturing,” he allegedly said in a pro-Hamas Telegram group. “God, God, how great they are!” The post has been widely circulated in pro-Israel media, although The Algemeiner could not independently confirm their authenticity.

During anti-Hamas protests in March 2025, video from northern Gaza showed demonstrators calling on al-Sharif by name while they were denouncing Hamas leaders. Protesters outside the al-Shifa hospital also criticized al-Sharif and Al Jazeera for what they described as a refusal to cover the outbreak of grassroots demonstrations across the enclave, with slogans including “Hamas, out!” and “Hey, hey, Hamas are terrorists.” As a major protest commenced outside, al-Sharif and his team remained inside the hospital, refusing to give the demonstrations airtime — a decision critics said aligned with Al Jazeera’s narrative that Hamas retained popular support and legitimacy.

Al Jazeera correspondents have previously received privileged access to Hamas military infrastructure. In one case, correspondent Mustafa Ashour was granted an exclusive tour of Hamas’s tunnels alongside military commanders — access denied to other media.

Other Gaza-based reporters, including Hussam Shabat, have been killed by Israeli strikes that the IDF says targeted militants with dual media roles.

Open-source social media accounts have circulated claims from a Gaza Telegram channel allegedly affiliated with the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades urging residents not to mourn al-Sharif, alleging he had provided internal security with information on anti-Hamas dissidents for arrest or elimination. While no corroborating evidence has yet been made public, the practice has precedent: In March 2020, journalist Hind Khoudary publicly doxxed peace activist Rami Aman to Hamas officials after he participated in a Zoom call with Israelis. A man was later arrested and tortured by Hamas internal security. Khoudary has gone on to work for Al Jazeera English since the start of the war.

In one of his last statements, al-Sharif appeared to criticize Hamas negotiators, saying they bore partial responsibility for the worsening situation in northern Gaza.

International outlets including the BBC, CNN, and Sky News condemned the killing as part of what they described as Israel’s pattern of targeting journalists. Israel maintains that al-Sharif was a legitimate military target due to his alleged operational role in Hamas.

Post Views: 27
Continue Reading

RSS

Belgian Politician Sparks Outrage by Refusing Rosh Hashanah Greeting Amid Rising Antisemitism

Matthias Diependaele, Minister‑President of Flanders, has faced backlash after declining to send a Rosh Hashanah message to Belgium’s Jewish community. Photo: Screenshot

A senior Belgian politician has sparked outrage by refusing to send a Jewish New Year message, amid a growing climate of hostility toward Jews and Israelis in Europe, where antisemitic attacks continue to rise.

Earlier this week, Matthias Diependaele, Minister‑President of Flanders — the Dutch-speaking region in northern Belgium — was asked by the Belgian Jewish newspaper The Centrale to provide a Rosh Hashanah message.

However, the newspaper received a message from Diependaele’s office declining the request.

“After internal deliberation, we regret to inform you that, given the current situation and sensitivities concerning the tensions in the Middle East, we cannot follow up on your request,” the statement read.

“Anything that bears even the slightest connection to this conflict is being closely monitored and examined under a magnifying glass. For that reason, we do not deem it opportune to go into this any further,” it continued.

According to the Jewish newspaper, requesting a Rosh Hashanah greeting from Belgium’s leaders for the country’s Jewish citizens has been a long-standing tradition.

“This year, even that became radioactive,” The Centrale wrote.

Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, will take place in late September this year.

Shortly after the newspaper published Diependaele’s response, which drew widespread outrage from Belgium’s Jewish community and leaders, the politician rejected claims of antisemitism and attempted to revise his earlier statement.

“My refusal is purely based on the principle that, for more than 15 years in my role as a representative of the people, I have not supported religious activities,” Diependaele wrote in a new letter sent to The Centrale.

“I have also never accepted invitations for the Eid. I have also never taken part in a Te Deum for Catholics,” the Belgian politician continued. “By this I am in no way passing judgment on any religion or on the people who practice it. It is, however, my conviction that no religion — including my own — has any role to play in the exercise of my mandate.”

However, the paper rejected Diependaele’s new letter, arguing that his shift from “too sensitive right now” to a “timeless principle” was an attempt to mask his initial fear of public backlash.

The World Jewish Congress sharply criticized Diependaele’s actions, denouncing it as a clear act of antisemitism.

“Holding Jews in the Diaspora collectively accountable for the actions of Israel – is antisemitic. To be a political leader, and to refuse to acknowledge the traditions and culture of your country’s Jewish community – because of Israel – is antisemitic,” the organization said in a statement.

“What transpired is quite clear: A political leader declined to acknowledge their Jewish citizens because of Israel and the perceived public backlash about engaging with Jews,” it continued.

Post Views: 32
Continue Reading

RSS

Israeli Hostage Families Sue ICC Prosecutor, Accuse Him of Aiding Hamas

International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan speaks during an interview with Reuters in The Hague, Netherlands, Feb. 12, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw

Families of three hostages still being held in Gaza by Hamas have filed a lawsuit against Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), accusing him of aiding the Palestinian terror group and obstructing justice.

On Wednesday, Israeli NGO Shurat HaDin, led by attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, announced a lawsuit worth NIS 20 million (about $5.9 million) on behalf of the families of Avinatan Or, Eitan Mor, and Omri Miran.

“The International Criminal Court has become a branch of Hamas. Through [Khan’s] direct actions, he gave an enormous tailwind to the terrorist murderers,” Darshan-Leitner, founder and president of Shurat HaDin, said in a statement.

The lawsuit accuses Khan of turning the ICC into “a branch office” of Hamas, the terrorist group that has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades, and calls for him to be investigated for allegedly acting against Israel to divert attention from sexual misconduct claims against him.

It also accuses Khan of undermining Israel, deceiving the plaintiffs, and providing support to terrorist organizations.

“The blood libels the defendant wove against the State of Israel and its leaders, by creating a false moral equivalence between the State of Israel – the victim – and the terrorists who hold the hostages and abuse them daily, granted legitimacy to the terrorists to continue extorting Israel while holding and abusing the hostages,” the lawsuit says about Khan.

According to the lawsuit, Khan failed for eight months to issue arrest warrants for senior Hamas leaders behind the Oct. 7, 2023, onslaught on Israel, including Mohammed Deif, Yahya Sinwar, and Ismail Haniyeh.

Even then, he opted not to pursue other figures from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, an allied terrorist group in Gaza, directly responsible for taking hostages.

In this way, the lawsuit argues that Khan drew a false moral equivalence between a democratic state defending itself and terrorist groups killing civilians, while delaying action, deflecting responsibility, and providing political cover to Hamas.

“We will not allow international courts to turn into sanctuaries for terror. We will not let them rewrite history. We will not stay silent while justice is hijacked,” the Israeli NGO said in a post on X.

In November, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and now-deceased Hamas terror leader Ibrahim al-Masri (better known as Mohammed Deif) for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza conflict.

Khan initially made his surprise demand for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on the same day in May that he suddenly canceled a long-planned visit to both Gaza and Israel to collect evidence of alleged war crimes. The last-second cancellation reportedly infuriated US and British leaders, as the trip would have offered Israeli leaders a first opportunity to present their position and outline any action they were taking to respond to the allegations.

However, the ICC said there were reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Gallant were criminally responsible for starvation in Gaza and the persecution of Palestinians — charges vehemently denied by Israel, which has provided significant humanitarian aid into the enclave during the war.

Israel also says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, despite Hamas’s widely acknowledged military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks.

US and Israeli officials have issued blistering condemnations of the ICC move, decrying the court for drawing a moral equivalence between Israel’s democratically elected leaders and the heads of Hamas, which launched the ongoing war in Gaza with its invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

Post Views: 29
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News