Uncategorized
Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell visit Israel and meet with Netanyahu amid looming crises
(JTA) — Judging from the photos and the tweets, it looked like a set of normal Congressional delegations to Israel: Senators posing with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The U.S. ambassador declaring that “Bipartisanship is alive and well in Israel!!” Pledges of mutual support amid external threats. Sen. Chuck Schumer standing arm-in-arm with Netanyahu, grinning.
But these are not normal times in Israel, where the Netanyahu government is advancing legislation to sap the power of the judiciary, drawing hundreds of thousands of people into the streets in protest. On top of that, a wave of violence is cresting over Israel and the West Bank: An Israeli raid on militants in the West Bank city of Nablus this week killed 11 Palestinians, and the State Department said it was “deeply concerned.”
Both of those crises were crescendoing as Schumer, the Jewish Democrat and Senate majority leader — as well as the Republican minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky — led delegations of their parties’ senators to the country. A few other delegations of current and former U.S. lawmakers also descended on Israel this week.
Neither Schumer nor McConnell spoke out about the court reform, and they did not respond to requests for comment on it. But it was a subtext of some politicians’ public statements. And earlier in the week, McConnell — along with several other Republican politicians — addressed the Hertog Forum, a conference organized by the Tikvah Fund, a conservative group that is underwritten by American Jewish philanthropists who are sympathetic to the judiciary reform.
“We see you as a staunch ally on so many issues, you’re going to see here of course the internal and external issues that are on our agenda,” Israeli President Isaac Herzog told Schumer. He explicitly mentioned external issues, including threats from Iran and efforts by Israel and the Biden administration to expand normalization agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors.
But the “internal” issue preoccupying Herzog right now is Netanyahu’s court overhaul. Herzog has thrown himself into efforts to get the governing coalition to put the brakes on the changes and enter into negotiations with the opposition.
Schumer picked up on the hint and praised Herzog for his skills at conciliation. “You give everybody a great deal of optimism, somebody like you in this position with your talent and your ability to bring people together and listen to all sides,” Schumer said.
Biden administration officials have called for a pause on proposed reforms, which could endanger civil rights protections in Israel. In addition to being the administration’s top ally in the Senate, Schumer is one of his party’s staunchest supporters of Israel.
Schumer’s emphasis on Herzog’s aptitude at “bringing people together” was telling: Israeli presidents are not generally expected to be professional conciliators (though Herzog’s predecessor took that role on as well). The job has historically been mostly ceremonial, with a focus on diplomatic representation to other nations.
But Herzog, in a dramatic speech last week, begged to play a new more involved role, as Israel faces a potential constitutional crisis and protests against the reforms go on.
For his part, Schumer in his remarks with Herzog noted that the delegation “is a very powerful group of senators, each head of a major committee or major area and we wanted to stop in Israel.” Among the delegation were Rhode Island’s Jack Reed, who heads the armed services committee, and Oregon’s Ron Wyden, one of the most influential lawmakers in the area of intelligence.
The judiciary reforms did apparently come up in meetings Netanyahu had with a third congressional delegation, organized by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. This delegation was solidly aligned with AIPAC’s traditional pro-Israel positions, and in interviews with the Times of Israel, two members of he delegation said the proposed judiciary reforms did not trouble them.
“At the end of the day, the changes that are made or not made, I still think that Israel is a very strong democracy, the only democracy in the Middle East, and I think our relationship continues to get stronger,” said Rep. Juan Vargas, a California Democrat who is among the closest in his caucus to AIPAC. Agreed Texas Republican Rep. Randy Weber: Netanyahu is “going to get this done.”
No one mentioned, at least not in public statements, the recent wave of Israeli-Palestinian violence. Releases from Netanyahu’s office were anodyne, praising the friendship of senators from both parties.
The American and Israeli leaders did openly discuss Iran as well as the Abraham Accords, the normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab countries. It may have been a sign that Netanyahu hopes Schumer is in the same place he was in 2015, when the senator was one of the few Democrats who opposed the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration.
President Joe Biden entered office pledging to reenter the deal, which former President Donald Trump had abandoned at Netanyahu’s behest. But in recent months Biden officials have said that talks to reenter the deal are all but dead.
Among the other congressional delegations in Israel was one including Sen. Tom Cotton, the Arkansas Republican who is said to have presidential ambitions. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who is weighing a presidential run, was also in Israel. Pompeo and Cotton are both close to Saudi Arabia — Cotton posed with its de facto leader, Mohammed bin Salman, on his way to Israel — and Netanyahu has made clear his strong desire to normalize relations with the kingdom.
Netanyahu also met with a delegation of Democratic lawmakers organized by J Street, the liberal Israel advocacy group.
—
The post Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell visit Israel and meet with Netanyahu amid looming crises 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.