Uncategorized
He’s running? Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett gives off comeback vibes on a DC visit.
WASHINGTON (JTA) — He left office after one of the shortest terms of any prime minister in Israeli history and doesn’t have an active political party.
But just 10 months after stepping down from Israel’s highest position, and amid historic upheaval in Israel, Naftali Bennett is signaling that he’s ready to run again.
Bennett, formerly seen as a hardline right-wing politician, upended Israeli politics in 2021 by leading an ideologically diverse coalition that unseated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after 12 straight years in office. But Bennett’s coalition fell apart after about a year, he stepped down and Netanyahu won the subsequent election.
Now, far from home, Bennett is taking the public stage. On a visit to Washington, D.C., this week, Bennett spoke at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy — a go-to destination for prominent Israeli politicians visiting the United States — took questions from reporters and met with a group of Democratic lawmakers. In a photo from that visit, Bennett appears in his element, explaining something to the group as a crowded room looks on.
“Today in a series of meetings with congressmen and congresswomen on the Hill as well as government officials,” he tweeted in Hebrew along with the photo. “It begins.”
What is beginning is not clear. Bennett wouldn’t answer a question about whether he will run again, and a spokeswoman did not respond to a request to elaborate. But his social media feed suggests that he’s missing being prime minister, and in remarks to reporters on Tuesday it sounded like he might shoot for the office again.
“I’ve become a huge believer that we need moderacy in the way we govern Israel for the next 10 years,” he said at a meeting organized by the Washington Institute, calling himself a “radical moderate.”
“I believe that Israel, for the next decade or two, we need centrist governments that can focus on 70% of the issues that Israelis agree upon, and setting aside that 30% of issues that are in ideological conflict,” Bennett said, repeating a formula he’s often used to describe his governing philosophy. “I think it’s the only way forward for the next 10 to 20 years. We have to pull ourselves out of this ongoing polarization and toxic dialogue. And I believe Israel can succeed by doing that.”
In another tweet, he noted polls showing him winning eight seats in Israel’s parliament were he to return to politics — more than the seven seats his former party, Yamina, won in 2021, before he became prime minister.
On Monday, the eve of Yom Hashoah, Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day, he posted a speech he delivered as prime minister last year, in which he extolled the virtue of Israel “relying only on ourselves to be strong, and to never apologize for our existence.”
Last week, prior to embarking on his stateside visit, he posted a Twitter thread favorably comparing his performance with Netanyahu’s. “As long as I can remember, I have taken responsibility,” he wrote, accusing Netanyahu and his top advisors of peddling “blame and excuses.” And in a video posted about a week earlier, marking the 100th day of Netanyahu’s current government, he touted the record of his coalition in its first 100 days last year, tweeting, “Something different is possible.” That tweet is now pinned to the top of his feed.
Netanyahu’s coalition has proposed a far-reaching overhaul of Israel’s judiciary that would sap the Supreme Court of much of its power, and which has spurred unprecedented street protests. Part of his mission in the United States, Bennett said at the Washington Institute meeting, was to push back against perceptions that the turmoil was weakening Israel.
“I see that our enemies believe that the protests are a sign of weakness,” Bennett said. “They are misinterpreting what Israel is about. This is a sign of strength, democracy in Israel will prevail, and Israel will come out stronger for all.”
However enthusiastic he may be, Bennett could have a long road to a comeback after emerging battered from his brief time as prime minister. For more than a decade, he had been a leading politician in the pro-settler camp, vehemently opposed to Palestinian statehood and seen as a right-wing influence on Netanyahu. For years, the two men worked together despite personal acrimony between them, but in 2021, Bennett took his party, whose name translated to “rightward” in English, and partnered with a motley crew of right-wing, centrist and left-wing parties, as well as an Islamist party.
Bennett’s former right-wing allies portrayed that decision as a betrayal, and multiple members of his own party defected, depriving his coalition of a parliamentary majority and leading to new elections. Bennett didn’t run and handed the prime ministership to his centrist coalition partner, Yair Lapid, who lost to Netanyahu last fall.
Lapid, who is now leader of the parliamentary opposition, appears to be getting a second wind from the massive antigovernment protests. A recent poll asking Israelis for their preferred prime minister showed him running neck and neck with Netanyahu. Another centrist politician, Benny Gantz, got even higher marks.
This poll didn’t ask about Bennett.
—
The post He’s running? Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett gives off comeback vibes on a DC visit. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
NATO Should Launch Operation to Boost Security in Arctic, Belgian Minister says
Belgian Defence Minister Theo Francken speaks to journalists as he arrives to an informal meeting of European Union defence ministers in Copenhagen, Denmark, August 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Tom Little
NATO should launch an operation in the Arctic to address US security concerns, Belgium’s defense minister told Reuters on Sunday, urging transatlantic unity amid growing European unease about US President Donald Trump’s push to take control of Greenland.
“We have to collaborate, work together and show strength and unity,” Theo Francken said in a phone interview, adding that there is a need for “a NATO operation in the high north.”
Trump said on Friday that the US needs to own Greenland to prevent Russia or China from occupying it in the future.
European officials have been discussing ways to ease US concerns about security around Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Francken suggested NATO’s Baltic Sentry and Eastern Sentry operations, which combine forces from different countries with drones, sensors and other technology to monitor land and sea, as possible models for an “Arctic Sentry.”
He acknowledged Greenland‘s strategic importance but said “I think that we need to sort this out like friends and allies, like we always do.”
A NATO spokesperson said on Friday that alliance chief Mark Rutte spoke with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio about the importance of the Arctic for shared security and how NATO is working to enhance its capabilities in the high north.
Denmark and Greenland‘s leaders have said that the Arctic island could not be annexed and international security did not justify such a move.
The US already has a military presence on the island under a 1951 agreement.
Uncategorized
IDF Strikes Hezbollah Weapons Sites in Lebanon After Army Denied Its Existence
Israeli strikes targeting Hezbollah’s terror infrastructure. Photo: Via i23, Photo from social media used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law.
i24 News – The Israel Defense Forces carried out airstrikes on a site in southern Lebanon that the Lebanese Army had previously declared free of Hezbollah activity, Israeli officials said on Sunday, citing fresh intelligence that contradicted Beirut’s assessment.
According to Israeli sources, the targeted location in the Kfar Hatta area contained significant Hezbollah weapons infrastructure, despite earlier inspections by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) that concluded no military installations were present.
Lebanese officials had conveyed those findings to international monitoring mechanisms, and similar claims were reported in the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar.
Israeli intelligence assessments, however, determined that Hezbollah continued to operate from the site.
During a second wave of strikes carried out Sunday, the IDF attacked and destroyed the location.
Video footage released afterward showed secondary explosions, which Israeli officials said were consistent with stored weapons or munitions at the site.
The IDF stated that the strike was conducted in response to what it described as Hezbollah’s ongoing violations of ceasefire understandings between Israel and Lebanon. Military officials said the targeted structure included underground facilities used for weapons storage.
According to the IDF, the same site had been struck roughly a week earlier after Israel alerted the Lebanese Army to what it described as active terrorist infrastructure in the area. While the LAF conducted an inspection following the warning, Israeli officials said the weapons facilities were not fully dismantled, prompting Sunday’s follow-up strike.
The IDF said it took measures ahead of the attack to reduce the risk to civilians, including issuing advance warnings to residents in the surrounding area.
“Hezbollah’s activity at these sites constitutes a clear violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon and poses a direct threat to the State of Israel,” the military said in a statement.
Israeli officials emphasized that operations against Hezbollah infrastructure would continue as long as such threats persist, underscoring that Israel retains the right to act independently based on its own intelligence assessments.
Uncategorized
Some US Senators Skeptical About Military Options for Iran
Demonstrators and activists rally in support of nationwide protests in Iran, outside the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., January 10, 2026. REUTERS/Tom Brenner
Some US lawmakers in both major parties on Sunday questioned whether military action against Iran is the best approach for the United States as Iranian authorities face growing turmoil.
US President Donald Trump in recent days has left open the possibility of American intervention in Iran, where the biggest anti-government protests in years have led to the Revolutionary Guards blaming unrest on terrorists and vowing to safeguard the governing system.
But at least two US senators sounded notes of caution during interviews on TV networks’ Sunday morning programs.
“I don’t know that bombing Iran will have the effect that is intended,” Republican Senator Rand Paul said on ABC News’ “This Week” show.
Rather than undermining the regime, a military attack on Iran could rally the people against an outside enemy, Paul and Democratic Senator Mark Warner said.
Warner, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” warned that a military strike against Iran could risk uniting Iranians against the United States “in a way that the regime has not been able to.” History shows the dangers of US intervention, said Warner, who argued that the US-backed 1953 overthrow of Iran’s government set in motion a chain of events that gradually led to the rise of the country’s Islamic regime in the late 1970s.
The Wall Street Journal on Sunday reported that US military and diplomatic officials will brief Trump on Tuesday about options for Iran, including cyberattacks and potential military action.
Iran has said it will target US military bases if the United States launches an attack. But Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who has often touted a muscular approach to foreign policy, said Trump “needs to embolden the protesters and scare the hell out of the [Iranian] regime.”
“If I were you, Mr. President, I would kill the leadership that are killing the people,” Graham said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” show. “You’ve got to end this.”
Reza Pahlavi, the US-based son of the Iranian shah who was ousted in 1979, said on Sunday he is prepared to return to Iran to lead a shift to a democratic government.
“I’m already planning on that,” Pahlavi said on “Sunday Morning Futures.” “My job is to lead this transition to make sure that no stone is left unturned, that in full transparency, people have an opportunity to elect their leaders freely and to decide their own future.”