Uncategorized
Nikki Haley, a favorite of the pro-Israel establishment, is the first Republican to challenge Trump
(JTA) — Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who became a pro-Israel favorite during her two years as the Trump administration’s ambassador to the United Nations, announced her bid for the presidency, becoming the first Republican to challenge the former president ahead of 2024.
In a video released Tuesday, Haley did not name Donald Trump, but alluded to him as a polarizing figure, emphasizing her efforts as governor at tamping down racial tensions and also suggesting that the Republican Party was alienating moderate Americans.
“We turned away from fear toward God and the values that still make our country the freest and greatest in the world,” Haley said, describing her 2015 decision to remove Confederate flags from state properties after a racist gunman murdered nine Black worshippers in a Charleston church. “We must turn in that direction again. Republicans have lost the popular vote in seven out of the last eight presidential elections. That has to change.”
Singling out her removal of the flags stands in her contrast with Trump, who has made a point of upholding resistance to the removal of Confederate moderates. Haley also leans in the 3.5-minute video into her roots as the child of Indian immigrants, another distinction from Trump, who has embraced anti-immigrant movements and has garnered the support of white supremacists. Trump announced his third run for the presidency in November.
Haley, as a governor with a national reputation, was already on the pro-Israel radar when Trump in 2017 named her as his first ambassador to the United Nations. Heading into the job, she consulted closely with pro-Israel groups and forged a close alliance with Israel’s delegation to the body.
Soon she was at the forefront of reversing decades of U.S. policy at the United Nations, preventing the hiring of Palestinians for top jobs, scrubbing Israel-critical reports, quitting the U.N. Human Rights Council and influencing Trump’s cutting of funding to UNRWA, the body providing relief to Palestinian refugees and their descendants.
That profile soon made her a star at conferences of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, where she consistently drew crowds and applause. It was at an AIPAC conference, in fact, when she coined her personal motto: “I wear high heels. It’s not for a fashion statement, it’s because if I see something wrong I will kick it every single time.”
Haley quit her ambassadorship at the end of 2018, but increased her pro-Israel profile. She used an appearance at the 2019 AIPAC conference to announce the establishment of her advocacy group, Stand for America, the first substantive sign she was running for president. She is a star speaker at the Republican Jewish Coalition and used the RJC platform in 2021 to chide AIPAC for what she said was an overemphasis on bipartisanship.
She has also cultivated Trump’s Jewish daughter, Ivanka, and her husband, Jared Kushner, who led Middle East diplomacy under Trump. Kushner’s father Charles has raised funds for her.
Haley used a version of her motto in her video Tuesday, in a way that could be read as a warning to Trump, who takes no prisoners in deriding opponents: “I don’t put up with bullies. And when you kick back, it hurts them more. If you’re wearing heels.” Haley notably called Trump a bully when in 2016 she backed a rival, Marco Rubio, for the GOP presidential nomination.
Haley’s relationship with Trump is characterized by wariness: Effusively praising him at times and then criticizing him. She seemed to cut him off entirely after the deadly Capitol insurrection by his supporters in 2021. “He went down a path he shouldn’t have, and we shouldn’t have followed him, and we shouldn’t have listened to him,” she told Politico the day after the riot. “And we can’t let that ever happen again.”
Within weeks, as it became clear that the GOP was not yet quitting Trump, Haley tried to make any talk of her differences with him the fault of the “liberal media.” “Strong speech by President Trump about the winning policies of his administration and what the party needs to unite behind moving forward,” she said on Twitter in March 2021 after Trump’s first post-presidency speech. “The liberal media wants a GOP civil war. Not gonna happen.”
Haley scores in the single digits in polling and announcing early is one way of getting her out in front; right now, Trump’s most formidable challenger, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, has yet to announce, although that has not stopped Trump from criticizing DeSantis almost daily.
Haley can count on pro-Israel money, but even there she has rivals. Mike Pompeo, the former Secretary of State who is also likely to announce a presidential bid, devoted a chunk of his recent autobiography to minimizing Haley’s role in the Trump administration, including in Trump’s Middle East policy. Pompeo accused Haley of plotting with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump to replace Mike Pence as vice-president. Pence, who has broken with Trump, is also considering a presidential run and his deep ties in the pro-Israel community.
—
The post Nikki Haley, a favorite of the pro-Israel establishment, is the first Republican to challenge Trump 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.