Uncategorized
Hard-liner Bezalel Smotrich was just put in charge of Israel’s settlements. Here’s what that means.
(JTA) – Last week, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich got one of his longtime wishes: authority over the civilian life of settlers, and some Palestinians, in the West Bank. The role is a chance for Smotrich, a right-wing firebrand and staunch advocate of annexing settlements to Israel, to mold the territory according to his ideology.
But this week, the perils of the job also became clear: After a Palestinian gunman shot and killed two Israelis in the village of Huwara on Sunday, a mob of settlers rampaged in the village, burning cars and buildings and injuring residents.
In the days following, at least publicly, Smotrich has appeared conflicted over his response to the riots. He liked a tweet calling to “wipe out” the village, then issued his own tweet addressed to his “settler brothers” decrying the rampaging. Then he shared a third set of tweets that endorsed collective punishment — but not through mob violence — and compared the riot to nonviolent protests in Tel Aviv.
Later in the week, he sympathized with the rioters and their goal. On Tuesday, he published a lengthy Facebook post in which he called the rioters “a small group whose patience ran out and who acted inappropriately.” Part of him, he wrote, wanted “to identify with the pain and the anger and the feeling that it’s impossible to sit quietly any longer.”
On Wednesday, a journalist asked him to explain why he liked the tweet calling for the village to be “wiped out.” “Because I think the village of Huwara should be wiped out, I think that the state of Israel should do it.” A few hours later, he again walked back his statement: “To remove any doubt, in my words I did not mean wiping out the village of Huwara, but rather acting in a targeted way against terrorists and supporters of terror, and exacting a heavy price from them in order to return security to local residents.”
Sunday’s violence points to the contentious issues Smotrich will have to handle in his new role, coping with escalating violence as he and his partners seek to reshape life in the West Bank.
Both Smotrich and his ideological foes are portraying his new job as the harbinger of a sea change in the territory — one that will expand the settlements and make them more entrenched. Meanwhile, the current Israeli government, which includes Smotrich and his far-right allies, has promised to build and recognize more settlements.
“The transfer of civilian authority over the settlements to us, and the beginning of the process of normalizing settlements, are also a great and strategic achievement,” he wrote in the Facebook post on Tuesday. “Even if it takes time to ripen and change the rudder of the ship, it will lead, God willing, to a dramatic change.”
Here’s a rundown of who Smotrich is, what his new job involves, how it fits in with the Israeli government’s settlement plans, and what his limits are.
Who is Bezalel Smotrich, and what job did he just receive?
Smotrich, 43, is himself a settler and has served in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, for nearly eight years. During that time, he’s been one of the most right-wing lawmakers in Knesset, and has faced blowback for comments denigrating Arab women and the LGBTQ community.
He has also spent years calling for the annexation of settlements and proposing legislation to that effect, to no avail. But his fortunes changed last year, when his party, Religious Zionism, won 14 seats, becoming the Knesset’s third-largest party.
The coalition agreement the party signed in December with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledges to give Smotrich authority over civilian life in the settlements. Governing all aspects of civilian life in the settlements is currently the province of Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and he and Smotrich clashed over the past couple of months.
Smotrich made clear he was impatient to assume the new role, and was worried Netanyahu was balking. “Defense minister Galant’s disavowal of the unequivocal agreement, and the prime minister’s foot-dragging on the matter are unacceptable and will not be allowed to continue,” he wrote on Twitter on Feb. 15.
But Netanyahu fulfilled the coalition agreement on Thursday, and in a deal signed by Netanyahu, Smotrich and Galant, Smotrich was handed authority over day-to-day affairs in the settlements. He tweeted that the deal entailed “A holiday for the residents of Judea and Samaria,” the Israeli government’s term for the West Bank.
Does that mean Smotrich is about to annex the settlements to Israel?
No. The agreement explicitly counts out annexation, and Smotrich was at pains in December to assure Americans, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, that annexation was not happening in the immediate future.
But Smotrich is now in charge of life in Area C of the West Bank, which makes up the bulk of the territory. All of the Israeli settlements are in Area C, where Israel has full control over civilian affairs. (The Palestinian Authority governs civilian life in Areas A and B, which comprise 40% of the West Bank and include the majority of the territories’ Palestinians.)
That is why critics of Netanyahu’s government are claiming that an annexation plan is at the heart of Netanyahu’s agreement with Smotrich. Michael Sfard, a prominent Israeli human rights lawyer, wrote that Smotrich is now effectively “the governor of the West Bank,” because he will be able to largely erase legal boundaries between the settlements and Israel’s recognized borders.
“Today the government of Israel has taken an action which entails de jure annexation of the West Bank,” wrote in posts on social media. “Transferring powers to Israeli civilian hands is an act of de jure annexation because it entails removing power from the occupying military and placing it directly in the hands of the government — this is an expression of sovereignty.”
Who’s in charge of Israel’s West Bank policy?
The particulars of the new arrangement in the West Bank, according to the deal signed on Thursday, are complex and a bit confusing. Smotrich is responsible for land use by Israelis and Palestinians in Area C, but it’s not clear if he has authority over Palestinian freedom of movement into and out of the area. His full responsibilities are listed in annexes not made public. The military, meanwhile, retains the authority to evacuate illegally built settlement outposts, though Smotrich may be able to stall that process.
That means it’s not clear who’s on top, except for a provision that makes Netanyahu the arbiter of any disputes between Smotrich and Galant, or Smotrich and the military.
The agreement does pledge to erase divisions between Israel and the Jewish settlements. It says Smotrich will launch an initiative called “Equality of Citizenship” that will “improve and streamline services in Judea and Samaria” through Israeli government ministries — that is, not via the military that has been in charge of such matters for more than half a century.
How is the U.S. responding?
The Biden administration, which has otherwise maintained friendly engagement with Netanyahu’s new government, had reportedly pressured him to renege on the new job for Smotrich. Biden officials found an ally on that issue in Israel’s defense establishment, which also was loath to hand over any degree of control to Smotrich, Axios reported.
And confusion in the chain of command when it comes to dismantling settlements may prompt the Biden administration to intervene, said Daniel Kurtzer, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
“The critical issues that we need to look at, they’re happening all over the place, whether it’s the transfer of authority from the Minister of Defense to Minister Smotrich for control over the civil administration, whether it’s the regularization of these outposts or their legalization,” said Kurtzer, who was speaking in a Zoom call last week organized by the Jewish Democratic Council of America.
Criticism also came from Israel’s opposition. Benny Gantz, a former defense minister and IDF chief of staff, tweeted out a confusing flow chart of the new division of responsibilities between Smotrich and Galant.
“This doesn’t look like a chain of command,” he wrote. “This looks like a labyrinth that endangers Israel’s security.”
What’s next?
Smotrich has already said he plans to accelerate the building of Jewish settlements and limit building by Palestinians in Area C. Palestinians say they build without permits in the area because the Israeli authorities rarely grant building permits. That’s unlikely to change now.
On Tuesday, Smotrich pledged that an illegal settlement that has repeatedly been dismantled will be rebuilt and recognized by the government. And his first comment after the agreement was reached was to reiterate his pledge to limit Palestinian rights.
He said, “We will act with determination to stop the illegal Arab takeover of open lands in Judea and Samaria.”
—
The post Hard-liner Bezalel Smotrich was just put in charge of Israel’s settlements. Here’s what that means. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Syrian Government, Kurds Agree to Integration Deal, US Hails ‘Historic Milestone’
Members of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) queue to settle their status with Syrian government in Raqqa, Syria, Jan. 27, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Karam al-Masri
The Syrian government and Kurdish forces declared a ceasefire deal on Friday that sets out a phased integration of Kurdish fighters into the state, averting a potentially bloody battle and drawing US praise for a “historic milestone.”
The sides announced the deal after government forces under President Ahmed al-Sharaa captured swathes of northern and eastern Syria from the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) group this month. This forced the Kurdish forces to retreat into a shrinking enclave in the northeast.
The fate of the SDF, which took over a quarter or more of Syria during its 2011-24 civil war, has been one of the biggest issues looming over Syria since Islamist insurgents led by Sharaa toppled President Bashar al-Assad 14 months ago.
US envoy Tom Barrack, who has been closely involved in mediation efforts, declared Friday’s accord “a profound and historic milestone in Syria’s journey toward national reconciliation, unity, and enduring stability.”
The SDF was once Washington’s main Syrian ally, playing a vital part in the fight against Islamic State terrorists. But its position grew weaker as President Donald Trump built close ties with Sharaa, a former al Qaeda commander who has now brought almost all of Syria back under the authority of Damascus.
US ENVOY PRAISES ‘COURAGEOUS STEPS’
Under the agreement, forces that had massed along front lines in the north would pull back and Interior Ministry security forces would deploy to the center of the cities of Hasakah and Qamishli in the northeast, both now held by the SDF.
The agreement includes the formation of a military division that will include three SDF brigades, in addition to a brigade for forces in the SDF-held town of Kobani, also known as Ain al-Arab, which will be affiliated to the governorate of Aleppo.
The Syrian official said the military division in the northeast would include “groups from the SDF within brigades, alongside other brigades.”
Governing bodies set up by the Kurdish-led groups in the northeast are to be merged with state institutions. But Elham Ahmad, a senior Kurdish official, told reporters via an interpreter that they would retain the co-chair system developed under autonomy-minded Kurdish authorities, with one male director and one female director.
Damascus and the SDF first struck an integration deal last March, but made scant progress toward implementation before a year-end deadline, paving the way for the government offensive.
“Both sides have taken courageous steps: the Syrian government in extending meaningful inclusion and rights, and the Kurdish communities in embracing a unified framework that honors their contributions while advancing the common good,” Barrack said.
Kurds have been on high alert for a potential government thrust into their remaining enclave, mindful of last year’s violence against minority Alawites and Druze.
Noah Bonsey, senior adviser with the International Crisis Group think tank, said the deal was “a potentially historic turning point” that appeared to lay out a middle ground for both sides.
“It spares northeast Syria what could have been a really ugly military showdown. Implementation will be tricky. There are a lot of challenges ahead,” he said.
Turkey said it was scrutinizing the agreement. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said “genuine integration is in Syria’s interest, and the parties are already aware of its conditions.”
Turkey has sent forces into Syria several times since 2016, deeming the SDF an extension of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which took up arms against the Turkish state in 1984 but began a peace process with Ankara in 2025.
UNIFYING SYRIAN TERRITORY
Ahmad, the Kurdish official, said France and the United States should establish a mechanism to ensure the deal is implemented correctly, citing fears it could be derailed by “spoilers,” without specifying further.
Syrian officials said on Friday they feared figures within the PKK who reject the deal would not abide by the ceasefire.
An SDF statement said the deal “aims to unify Syrian territory and achieve full integration in the region.” The Syrian government shared an almost identical statement with Reuters.
A senior Syrian government official told Reuters the deal was final and had been reached late on Thursday night, and that implementation was to begin immediately.
The statements did not address control of the last remaining SDF-controlled border crossing to northern Iraq, known as Semalka. The Syrian official said the Syrian state would take over all border crossings.
Ahmad said Semalka border officials would be integrated into the central state but that more discussions would need to be held with Damascus.
Uncategorized
US Imposes Sanctions on Iran’s Interior Minister, Businessman
USA and Iranian flags are seen in this illustration taken, Sept. 8, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
The United States on Friday imposed sanctions on Iranian Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni and a businessman it said helped launder money for Tehran, as President Donald Trump’s administration ramps up pressure on the Islamic Republic.
The Department of the Treasury, announcing the move, said Momeni was responsible for a brutal security crackdown in Iran this month as he oversees law enforcement forces it said were responsible for the deaths of thousands of peaceful protesters.
Trump has in recent weeks issued threats to intervene in Iran over the bloody suppression of the protests and has sent warships to the Middle East, even as he has said he plans to talk with the government there.
The financial sanctions on Friday also targeted five other Iranian security officials involved in “violently repressing the Iranian people,” the Treasury said in a statement.
Sanctions were also issued against investor Babak Zanjani and two digital asset exchanges registered in Britain that the Treasury said had processed funds linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US would continue to target Iranian elites and their networks, who he said exploit digital assets to evade sanctions and finance cybercriminal operations.
“Like rats on a sinking ship, the regime is frantically wiring funds stolen from Iranian families to banks and financial institutions around the world. Rest assured, Treasury will act,” Bessent said in the statement.
Uncategorized
US Slows Transfers of Islamic State Detainees to Iraq, Sources Say
Syrian security forces stand guard outside al-Aqtan prison, where some Islamic State detainees are held, in Raqqa, Syria, Jan. 23, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Karam al-Masri
Transfers of Islamic State detainees from Syria to Iraq by the US military have slowed this week, seven sources familiar with the matter said, following calls by Baghdad for other countries to repatriate thousands of foreign jihadists.
The US military said on Jan. 21 it had started to transfer the detainees. Its announcement followed the rapid collapse of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in northeast Syria, which caused uncertainty about the security of prisons and detention camps they were guarding.
The United States had expected to transfer up to 7,000 fighters to Iraq within days. But more than a week later, only about 500 have been moved, according to two Iraqi judicial officials, two Iraqi security officials, and three diplomats, some from countries whose nationals are among those transferred.
An Iraqi foreign ministry official put the number at under 500 so far.
Baghdad asked the US to slow the influx to make time for negotiations with other countries on repatriating their own nationals among the detainees and to prepare additional facilities to host the fighters, the Iraqi officials and a Western diplomat told Reuters.
Those moved to Iraqi facilities so far include about 130 Iraqis and some 400 foreigners, the Iraqi judicial sources, the Iraqi security officials and a Western diplomat said.
The slowdown, which has not previously been reported, is linked to Western governments’ reservations about bringing home their own citizens who joined the Islamic State‘s brutal self-declared caliphate across swathes of Syria and Iraq from 2014.
Most foreign fighters were subsequently captured in Syria and held in prisons in the northeast for years without trial.
The US State Department and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment on the transfers.
IRAQ BALKS AT MASS TRANSFER
Iraq agreed to host the detainees being moved by the US military after a brief escape by dozens of fighters from one facility in Syria prompted concerns that more could flee, Iraqi government officials said.
But although it has already tried and sentenced dozens of foreign fighters in recent years, Baghdad balked at the prospect of having the full 7,000 in its custody, the officials said.
The influx could overwhelm Iraq’s courts and prisons, and sentencing detainees to death would prompt criticism from Western countries and rights groups, they said.
“It’s a trap,” one of the senior Iraqi judicial sources said. “These Western countries object to the death penalty, but refuse to receive their terrorists. Why should we bear the burden of being seen as the butcher?”
Responding to questions from Reuters, Hisham al-Alawi, Undersecretary of Iraq‘s Foreign Ministry for Political Planning, said fewer than 500 detainees had been transferred to Iraq so far.
“For years, Iraq has been urging foreign states to assume their responsibilities by taking back their citizens and dealing with them in accordance with their own laws. While some countries have taken the initiative, a large number of states have not responded to our requests,” Alawi said.
The dilemma of what to do with foreign nationals who joined Islamic State has plagued Western countries for the last decade.
Securing guilty verdicts against such detainees in their home countries could be harder than in Iraq, said four diplomats from countries whose nationals were captured in Syria, citing a greater need to prove direct participation in violent crimes.
Governments in such countries could face a public backlash if Islamic State fighters were repatriated and then freed, the diplomats said.
The return of an Islamic State-linked woman to Norway in 2020 caused a cabinet crisis that ultimately brought down the government.
As a result of Western nations’ hesitations, thousands of foreign fighters detained in Syria and Iraq remained there for nearly a decade – even though the US, which repatriated and tried its nationals, urged other countries to do the same.
REPATRIATION THE ONLY ANSWER, EXPERT SAYS
The senior Iraqi judicial source said Baghdad was working with the US State Department on increasing pressure on other countries to begin repatriations.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said after transfers had begun that foreign Islamic State members would be in Iraq temporarily. “The United States urges countries to take responsibility and repatriate their citizens in these facilities to face justice,” he said.
Two diplomats from countries with nationals now in Iraq said their governments faced an uncomfortable choice between repatriation – which would be unpopular domestically – and the possibility that their nationals would face the death penalty if tried in Iraq, an outcome that could outrage voters at home.
One of the diplomats said Baghdad had begun conversations with their country about repatriations but that their government’s policy was unchanged.
“It would be difficult for us to accept that they are transferred to Iraq if they are then going to get their head chopped off,” the second diplomat said.
Letta Tayler, an associate fellow at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, said the mass transfer of detainees to Iraq “has mind-boggling legal implications, none of them positive.”
It could prolong their indefinite detention without trial and place detainees at risk of torture and executions based on flawed convictions, Tayler said. The US has raised concerns about unfair trials of Islamic State detainees in Iraq.
“The only viable solution is for countries with fair justice systems to repatriate their nationals,” Tayler said.