Uncategorized
Antony Blinken tells AIPAC Israel-Saudi ties are a priority while 2-state solution ‘can feel remote’
WASHINGTON (JTA) — The Biden administration is fully invested in Israel-Saudi normalization, Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC on Monday. He also said he does not see a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian peace happening anytime soon.
“The United States has a real national security interest in promoting normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia,” Blinken said Monday to applause at a policy summit of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
He said it was critical not to escalate the Israel-Palestinian conflict but also made it clear that the Biden administration would not push for a revival of peace talks in the near term. “It’s no secret that today the prospects for a two-state solution can feel remote,” he said. “But we are committed to working with partners and with the parties to at least maintain a horizon of hope.”
The emphasis on regional normalization over pushing Israel into reengagement with the Palestinians will be welcomed in Jerusalem, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is leading the most right-wing government in Israeli history, and has intensified Israeli claims to disputed territory.
Netanyahu additionally has said his foreign policy priority is a deal with Saudi Arabia. The Biden administration last year helped broker the launch of Israeli overflights of Saudi air space.
Blinken formally announced that the Biden administration would name a senior official to manage the Abraham Accords, the 2020 normalization agreements between Israel and four Arab nations that was a signature foreign policy achievement of the Trump administration, and one of the few Trump policies embraced by Biden.
“We will soon create a new position to further our diplomacy and engagement with governments and private sector, non-governmental organizations, all working toward a more peaceful and a more connected region,” he said. “We’ve already achieved historic progress to deepen and broaden the Abraham Accords, building on the work of the Trump administration.”
Biden has already decided chosen former ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro for the role, Axios reported last month. Shapiro is already leading an Abraham Accords expansion initiative at the influential Atlantic Council think tank.
Among the agenda items for the 500 AIPAC activists when they visit most of the offices in Congress on Tuesday is lobbying for the passage of bills that would advance the Abraham Accords, through diplomacy and cooperative projects.
Blinken emphasized continuing Biden administration unhappiness with some Israeli practices that have intensified under the. new Israeli government, including the demolition of Palestinian homes and settlement expansion.
He also emphatically condemned the Palestinian Authority’s policies of subsidizing the families of terrorists who were imprisoned or killed in the course of their actions.
“We have to continue to reject unequivocally actions taken by any party that undermine the process toward a two state solution processes use a solution that includes acts of terrorism, payments to terrorists in prison, violence against civilians,” he said. Israeli and pro-Israel officials have long complained that pressure on Israel not to escalate is not matched with similar pressure on the Palestinians.
Blinken also alluded to Biden administration concerns about plans by Netanyahu’s government — suspended for the time being — to radically overhaul the courts system.
“We’ll continue to work with the Israeli government to advance our shared values will continue to express our support for core democratic principles, including the separation of powers, checks and balances and the equal administration of justice for all citizens of Israel,” he said.
Opponents of the proposed changes, who have been staging massive weekly protests in Israel and smaller demonstrations around the world, say the overhaul would sap the courts of their independence and remove a bulwark that protects democracy and vulnerable populations, including women, Arabs, the LGBTQ community and non-Orthodox Jews. The courts overhaul is one reason Biden has yet to invite Netanyahu to the White House.
AIPAC’s agenda also includes bills that would further isolate Iran, which Israel regards as its most dangerous enemy. At the outside of his term, Biden sought to revive the deal with Iran that exchanged its agreement to roll back its nuclear development in exchange for sanctions relief; Trump had pulled out of the deal.
More recently, U.S. officials have said Iranian actions, including advanced nuclear activity and its backing for Russia in its invasion of Ukraine, have put a freeze on those plans. Blinken said diplomacy remains the preferred way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but he said pressure was the preferred method for now. Deterrence, he said to applause, “includes strengthening Israel’s military capabilities.”
—
The post Antony Blinken tells AIPAC Israel-Saudi ties are a priority while 2-state solution ‘can feel remote’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ to Convene at WH on Feb. 19, One Day After Trump’s Meeting with Netanyahu
US President Donald Trump speaks to the media during the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/File Photo
i24 News – A senior official from one of the member states confirms to i24NEWS that an invitation has been received for a gathering of President Trump’s Board of Peace at the White House on February 19, just one day after the president’s planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The meeting comes amid efforts to advance the implementation of the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire, following the limited reopening of the Rafah crossing, the expected announcement on the composition and mandate of the International Stabilization Force, and anticipation of a Trump declaration setting a deadline for Hamas to disarm.
In Israel officials assess that the announcement is expected very soon but has been delayed in part due to ongoing talks with the Americans over Israel’s demands for the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip. Trump reiterated on Thursday his promise that Hamas will indeed be disarmed.
Uncategorized
If US Attacks, Iran Says It Will Strike US Bases in the Region
FILE PHOTO: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi meets with Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi in Muscat, Oman, February 6, 2026. Photo: Omani Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
Iran will strike US bases in the Middle East if it is attacked by US forces that have massed in the region, its foreign minister said on Saturday, insisting that this should not be seen as an attack on the countries hosting them.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi spoke to Qatari Al Jazeera TV a day after Tehran and Washington pledged to continue indirect nuclear talks following what both sides described as positive discussions on Friday in Oman.
While Araqchi said no date had yet been set for the next round of negotiations, US President Donald Trump said they could take place early next week. “We and Washington believe it should be held soon,” Araqchi said.
Trump has threatened to strike Iran after a US naval buildup in the region, demanding that it renounce uranium enrichment, a possible pathway to nuclear bombs, as well as stopping ballistic missile development and support for armed groups around the region. Tehran has long denied any intent to weaponize nuclear fuel production.
While both sides have indicated readiness to revive diplomacy over Tehran’s long-running nuclear dispute with the West, Araqchi balked at widening the talks out.
“Any dialogue requires refraining from threats and pressure. (Tehran) only discusses its nuclear issue … We do not discuss any other issue with the US,” he said.
Last June, the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, joining in the final stages of a 12-day Israeli bombing campaign. Tehran has since said it has halted uranium enrichment activity.
Its response at the time included a missile attack on a US base in Qatar, which maintains good relations with both Tehran and Washington.
In the event of a new US attack, Araqchi said the consequences could be similar.
“It would not be possible to attack American soil, but we will target their bases in the region,” he said.
“We will not attack neighboring countries; rather, we will target US bases stationed in them. There is a big difference between the two.”
Iran says it wants recognition of its right to enrich uranium, and that putting its missile program on the negotiating table would leave it vulnerable to Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France?
As a historian of modern France, I have rarely seen a connection between my everyday life in my adopted state of Texas and my work on my adopted specialization: the period we call Vichy France. Apart from the Texan boast that the Lone Star Republic is bigger than the French Republic, and the small town of Paris, Texas, which boasts its own Eiffel Tower, I had no reason to compare the two places where I have spent more than half of my life.
Until now.
Last week, professors and instructors at the University of Houston received an unsettling memo from the administration, which asked us to sign a statement that we teach rather than “indoctrinate” our students.
Though the administration did not define “indoctrinate,” it hardly takes a PhD in English to read between the lines. Indoctrination is precisely what our state government has already forbidden us from doing in our classes. There must not be the slightest sign in our courses and curricula of references to diversity, identity and inclusion. The catch-all word used is “ideology,” a term Governor Greg Abbott recently invoked when he warned that “Texas is targeting professors who are more focused on pushing leftist ideologies rather than preparing students to lead our nation. We must end indoctrination.”
This is not the first time in the past several months that I have been reminded of what occurred in France during the four years that it was ruled by its German occupiers and Vichy collaborators.
Very briefly, with Germany’s rapid and complete defeat of France in 1940, an authoritarian, antisemitic and collaborationist regime assumed power. Among its first acts was to purge French Jews from all the professions, including high school and university faculties, and to impose an “oath of loyalty” to the person of Marshal Philippe Pétain, the elderly but ramrod straight and clear-headed hero of World War I.
The purpose of the oath was simple and straightforward: By demanding the fealty of all state employees to the person of Pétain, it also demanded their hostility to the secular and democratic values of the French republican tradition. Nevertheless, an overwhelming majority of teachers signed the oath —even the novelist and feminist Simone de Beauvoir, who needed her salary as a lycée teacher, as did the writer Jean Guéhenno, a visceral anti-Pétainist who continued to teach at the prestigious Paris lycée Henri IV until he was fired in 1943.
Vichy’s ministers of education understood the vital importance that schools and universities played in shaping citizens. Determined to replace the revolutionary values of liberty, equality and fraternity with the reactionary goals of family, work and homeland, they sought to eliminate “godless schools” and instill a “moral order” based on submission to state and church authorities. This radical experiment, powered by a reactionary ideology, to return France to the golden age of kings, cardinals and social castes came to an inglorious end with the Allied liberation of the country and collapse of Vichy scarcely four years after it had begun.
The French Jewish historian Marc Bloch — who joined the Resistance and sacrificed his life on behalf of a very different ideology we can call humanism — always insisted on the importance of comparative history. But comparison was important not because it identified similarities but because it illuminated differences. Clearly, the situation of professors at UH is very different from that of their French peers in Vichy France. We are not risking our jobs, much less our lives, by resisting this ham-handed effort to demand our loyalty to an anti-indoctrination memo.
But the two situations are not entirely dissimilar, either. Historians of fascism like Robert Paxton remind us that such movements begin slowly, then suddenly assume terrifying proportions. This was certainly the case in interwar France, where highly polarized politics, frequent political violence and a long history of antisemitism and anti-republicanism prepared the ground for Vichy. In France, Paxton writes, this slow, then sudden transformation “changed the practice of citizenship from the enjoyment of constitutional rights and duties to participation in mass ceremonies of affirmation and conformity.”
As an historian of France, I always thought its lurch into authoritarianism was shocking, but not surprising. After all, many of the elements for this change had existed well before 1940. But as a citizen of America, I am not just shocked, but also surprised by official demands for affirmation and conformity. One day I will find the time to think hard about my naiveté. But the time is now to think about how we should respond to these demands.
The post My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France? appeared first on The Forward.