Uncategorized
‘Two Israels’: What’s really behind the judicial reform protests
(JTA) — When Benjamin Netanyahu put his controversial calls for judicial reform on pause two weeks ago, many thought the protesters in Israel and abroad might declare victory and take a break. And yet a week ago Saturday some 200,000 people demonstrated in Tel Aviv, and pro-democracy protests continued among Diaspora Jews and Israeli expats, including those who gather each Sunday in New York’s Washington Square Park.
On its face, the weeks of protest have been about proposed legislation that critics said would sap power from the Israeli Supreme Court and give legislators — in this case, led by Netanyahu’s recently elected far-right coalition — unchecked and unprecedented power. Protesters said that, in the absence of an Israeli constitution establishing basic rights and norms, they were fighting for democracy. The government too says the changes are about democracy, claiming under the current system unelected judges too often overrule elected lawmakers and the will of Israel’s diverse electorate.
But the political dynamics in Israel are complex, and the proposals and the backlash are also about deeper cracks in Israeli society. Yehuda Kurtzer, president of the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, recently said in a podcast that the crisis in Israel represents “six linked but separate stories unfolding at the same time.” Beyond the judicial reform itself, these stories include the Palestinians and the occupation, a resurgent patriotism among the center and the left, chaos within Netanyahu’s camp, a Diaspora emboldened to weigh in on the future of Zionism and the rejection on the part of the public of a reform that failed the “reasonableness test.”
“If these protests are effective in the long run, it will be, I think, because they will have succeeded at reorganizing and mobilizing the Israeli electorate to think and behave differently than before,” said Kurtzer.
I recently asked observers, here and in Israel, what they feel is really mobilizing the electorate, and what kind of Israel will emerge as a result of the showdown. The respondents included organizers of the protests, supporters of their aims and those skeptical of the protesters’ motivations. They discussed a slew of issues just below the surface of the protest, including the simmering Israeli-Palestinian conflict, divisions over the increasing strength of Israel’s haredi Orthodox sector, and a lingering divide between Ashkenazi Jews with roots in Europe and Mizrahi Jews whose ancestry is Middle Eastern and North African.
Conservatives, meanwhile, insist that Israeli “elites” — the highly educated, the tech sector, the military leadership, for starters — don’t respect the will of the majority who brought Netanyahu and his coalition partners to power.
Here are the emerging themes of weeks of protest:
Defending democracy
Whatever their long-term concerns about Israel’s future, the protests are being held under the banner of “democracy.”
For Alon-Lee Green, one of the organizers of the protests, the issues are equality and fairness. “People in Israel,” said Green, national co-director of Standing Together, a grassroots movement in Israel, “hundreds of thousands of them, are going out to the streets for months now not only because of the judicial reform, but also — and mainly — because of the fundamental question of what is the society we want to live in: Will we keep living in a society that is unequal, unfair and that is moving away from our basic needs and desires, or will it be an equal society for everyone who lives in our land?”
Shany Granot-Lubaton, who has been organizing pro-democracy rallies among Israelis living in New York City, says Netanyahu, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and the coalition’s haredi Orthodox parties “are waging a war against democracy and the freedoms of citizens.”
“They seek to exert control over the Knesset and the judicial system, appoint judges in their favor and legalize corruption,” she said. “If this legal coup is allowed to proceed, minorities will be in serious danger, and democracy itself will be threatened.”
Two researchers at the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Herzliya’s Reichman University, psychology student Benjamin Amram and research associate Keren L.G. Snider, said Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reform “undermines the integrity of Israel’s democracy by consolidating power.”
“How can citizens trust a government that ultimately has no limitations set upon them?” they asked in a joint email. “At a time when political trust and political representation are at the lowest points, this legislation can only create instability and call into question the intentions of the current ruling party. When one coalition holds all the power, laws and policies can be swiftly overturned, causing instability and volatility.”
A struggle between two Israels
Other commentators said the protests revealed fractures within Israeli society that long predated the conflict over judicial reform. “The split is between those that believe Israel should be a more religious country, with less democracy, and see democracy as only a system of elections and not a set of values, and those who want Israel to remain a Jewish and democratic state,” Tzipi Livni, who served in the cabinets of right-wing prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert before tacking to the center in recent years, recently told Haaretz.
Author and translator David Hazony called this “a struggle between two Israels” — one that sees Israel’s founding vision as a European-style, rights-based democracy, and the other that sees that vision as the return of the Jews to their ancient homeland.
“Those on the first side believe that the judiciary has always been Israel’s protector of rights and therefore of democracy, against the rapaciousness and lawlessness of politicians in general and especially those on the right. Therefore an assault on its supremacy is an assault on democracy itself. They accuse the other side of being barbaric, antidemocratic and violent,” said Hazony, editor of the forthcoming anthology “Jewish Priorities.”
As for the other side, he said, they see an activist judiciary as an attempt by Ashkenazi elites to force their minority view on the majority. Supporters of the government think it is entirely unreasonable “for judges to think they can choose their successors, strike down constitutional legislation and rule according to ‘that which is reasonable in the eyes of the enlightened community in Israel,’” said Hazony, quoting Aharon Barak, the former president of the Supreme Court of Israel and bane of Israel’s right.
(Naveh Dromi, a right-wing columnist for Yediot Achronot, puts this more bluntly: “The problem,” she writes, “lies in the fact that the left has no faith in its chance to win an election, so it relies on the high court to represent it.”)
Daniel Tauber, an attorney and Likud Central Committee member, agrees that those who voted for Netanyahu and his coalition have their own concerns about a democracy — one dominated by “elites,” which in the Israeli context means old-guard Ashkenazi Jews, powerful labor unions and highly educated secular Jews. “The more this process is subject to veto by non-democratic institutions, whether it be the Court chosen as it is, elite military units, the Histadrut [labor union], or others, the more people will lose faith in democracy,” said Tauber.
Green also said there is “a war waging now between two elites in Israel” — the “old and more established liberal elite, who consist of the financial, high-tech army and industry people,” and the “new emerging elite of the settlers and the political far-right parties.”
Israelis protest against the government’s planned judicial overhaul, outside the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, March 27, 2023. (Jamal Awad/Flash90)
And yet, he said, “I think we will lose if one of these elites wins. The real victory of this historic political moment in Israel will be if we achieve true equality, both to the people who are not represented by the Jewish supremacists, such as the Palestinian citizens of Israel, and to the people who are not represented by the ‘old Israel,’ such as the haredi and Mizrahi people on the peripheries.”
The crises behind the crisis
Although the protests were ignited by Netanyahu’s calls for judicial reform, they also represented pushback against the most right-wing government in Israeli history — which means at some level the protests were also about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the role of religion in Israeli society. “The unspoken motivation driving the architects and supporters of the [judicial] ‘reform,’ as well as the protest leaders, is umbilically connected to the occupation,” writes Carolina Landsmann, a Haaretz columnist. If Netanyahu has his way, she writes, “There will be no more two-state solution, and there will be no territorial compromises. The new diplomatic horizon will be a single state, with the Palestinians as subjects deprived of citizenship.”
Nimrod Novik, the Israel Fellow at the Israel Policy Forum, said that “once awakened, the simmering resentment of those liberal Israelis about other issues was brought to the surface.” The Palestinian issue, for example, is at an “explosive moment,” said Novik: The Palestinian Authority is weakened and ineffective, Palestinian youth lack hope for a better future, and Israeli settlers feel emboldened by supporters in the ruling coalition. “The Israeli security establishment took this all into account when warning the government to change course before it is too late,” said Novik.
Kurtzer too noted that the Palestinians “also stand to be extremely victimized following the passage of judicial reform, both in Israel and in the West Bank.” And yet, he said, most Israelis aren’t ready to upend the current status quo between Israelis and Palestinians. “It can also be true that the Israeli public can only build the kind of coalition that it’s building right now because it is patently not a referendum on the issue of Palestinian rights,” he said.
Religion and state
Novik spoke about another barely subterranean theme of the protests: the growing power of the haredi, or ultra-Orthodox, parties. Secular Israelis especially resent that the haredim disproportionately seek exemption from military service and that non-haredi Israelis contribute some 90% of all taxes collected. One fear of those opposing the judicial reform legislation is that the religious parties will “forever secure state funding to the haredi Orthodox school system while exempting it from teaching the subjects required for ever joining the workforce. It is to secure for them an exemption from any military or other national service. And it is to expand the imposition of their lifestyle on non-Orthodox Israelis.”
What’s next
Predictions for the future range from warnings of a civil war (by Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, among others) to an eventual compromise on Netanyahu’s part to the emergence of a new center electorate that will reject extremists on both ends of the political spectrum.
David E. Bernstein, a law professor at the George Mason University School of Law who writes frequently about Israel, imagines a future without extremists. “One can definitely easily imagine the business, academic and legal elite using their newfound political voice to insist that future governments not align with extremists, that haredi authority over national life be limited, and, perhaps most important, that Israel create a formal constitution that protects certain basic rights,” he said. “Perhaps there will also be demand to counter such long-festering problems as corruption, disproportionate influence over export markets by a few influential families, burgeoning lawlessness in the Arab sector and a massive shortage of affordable housing.”
Elie Bennett, director of International Strategy at the Israel Democracy Institute, also sees an opportunity in the crisis.
In the aftermath of the disastrous 1973 Yom Kippur war, he said, Israel “rebuilt its military and eventually laid the foundations for today’s ‘startup nation.’ In this current crisis, we do not need a call-up of our reserves forces, or a massive airlift of American weaponry to prevail. What we need is goodwill among fellow Israelis and a commitment to work together to strengthen our society and reach an agreed-upon constitutional framework. If we are able to achieve such an agreement, it will protect our rights, better define the relationships between the branches of government, and result in an Israel that is more stable and prosperous than ever as we celebrate 75 years of independence.”
—
The post ‘Two Israels’: What’s really behind the judicial reform protests appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Sovereignty Is the Soul of Democracy
A general view shows the plenum at the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Democracy is often invoked as a slogan, yet rarely defined with precision. It is more than elections and campaign rallies. A true democracy rests on institutions that limit power, protect minorities, and uphold the rule of law even when it is politically inconvenient. A democracy requires an independent judiciary, a free press, and leaders who understand that their authority is temporary and constrained by law. Above all, democracy requires sovereignty: a nation must be free to govern itself.
By all of these standards, Israel stands as one of the most dynamic democracies in the world.
Israel’s parliamentary system is frequently misunderstood, particularly by observers accustomed to the American two party structure. Unlike the United States, Israel’s multi-party parliamentary democracy allows a wide range of political voices to enter the Knesset.
Coalition governments are formed through negotiation and compromise. This system may appear fragmented to outsiders, but in truth, it reflects a deeper level of representation. Communities that would be marginalized in a two-party structure can influence national policy. Power is dispersed rather than concentrated.
That dispersion of power is a democratic strength.
It also explains why Israel’s institutions continue to work, even amid intense political debate. The country has seen repeated elections, coalition collapses, and fierce public protests. Yet the army remains under civilian control. The courts continue their work. The press operates freely. These are not signs of instability. They are signs of democratic strength.
The legal proceedings involving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offer a powerful illustration. Whatever one’s political view of Netanyahu, the fact that a sitting prime minister can face prosecution demonstrates the independence of Israel’s judiciary. In much of the Middle East, leaders are untouchable. In Israel, no one is above the law. The trial proceeds through established legal channels, with the defense and prosecution presenting their arguments before judges bound by statute.
President Trump recently urged Israeli President Isaac Herzog to pardon Netanyahu. President Herzog responded appropriately. He emphasized that he is the president of Israel and that any pardon request would be considered only after legal proceedings conclude, in accordance with the law. That response was not defiance. It was democratic clarity.
Sovereignty is not a rhetorical flourish. It is the bedrock of self government. Critics frequently scrutinize Israel’s democracy, often holding it to standards not applied elsewhere in the region. Yet Israel remains the only state in the Middle East where self government actually happens — where civil society is vibrant, protest is protected, and the media is relentless.
Democracy is not the absence of controversy. It is the presence of functioning institutions capable of withstanding controversy.
Israel’s strength lies not only in its military or technological achievements but in its commitment to law and accountable governance.
Sovereignty is not negotiable. It is the soul of democracy itself.
Sabine Sterk is the CEO of Time To Stand Up For Israel.
Uncategorized
Tucker Carlson Did Not Even Leave the Airport During Quick Israel Visit to Interview Mike Huckabee
Tucker Carlson speaks at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana, Oct. 21, 2025. Photo: Gage Skidmore/ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
Controversial podcaster Tucker Carlson spent only a few hours in Israel on Wednesday to interview US Ambassador Mike Huckabee and chose not to leave the Ben Gurion Airport complex before flying out of the Jewish state, of which he has been strident critic.
Carlson landed at the airport on a private flight, did not leave the premises while interviewing Huckabee, and then immediately returned to Europe, Israel’s Channel 14 reported.
Sources also confirmed to the Jerusalem Post that the visit went as planned: short and confined to Ben Gurion Airport with Carlson arriving and leaving on private flights.
Channel 14 correspondent Libby Alon noted on the social media platform X that Carlson opted not to spend time any time in the country “despite all the invitations from the Christian community in Israel.”
Carlson, who describes himself as an ardent Christian, has falsely accused Israel, whose Christian population is growing and well educated, of persecuting Christians. Critics have noted that the far-right media personality has seemingly devoted more time on his podcast to targeting Israel over its treatment of Christians than to other parts of the world, such as Nigeria, where Christians are being murdered and otherwise persecuted in large numbers.
On Wednesday, Carlson posted a “Greetings from Israel” message on X which included a photo of himself with his left arm over the shoulder of an unnamed man, both standing in front of fluttering Israeli flags.
Greetings from Israel. pic.twitter.com/1uBWvqBNST
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) February 18, 2026
Online disagreements between Carlson and Huckabee over allegations of Israel mistreating Christians had prompted the quick trip.
On Feb. 4, Carlson published a nearly 90-minute podcast on X, titled “Christian Persecution,” which he promoted by asking, “How does the US-funded Israeli government treat Christians in the Holy Land? We asked some. Listen carefully to their accounts. This will shock you.” He interviewed Anglican Archbishop of Jerusalem Hosam Naoum and Saad Mouasher, a Christian businessman in Jordan who serves as the chairman of Jordan Ahli Bank.
Carlson then highlighted such segments in his discussions as “The Christian Hospital in Gaza That Was Bombed Eight Times by Israel,” “How Many People Have Been Killed in Gaza?” “How Are Christians Treated in Israel?” “How Much Has Jewish Extremism Increased in Jerusalem?” “Why Israel Makes It Difficult for Christians to Visit Holy Sites,” and “Why Christians Are Safer in Jordan Than Israel.”
Huckabee shared Carlson’s X posting that day and responded on top of it: “Hey @TuckerCarlson instead of talking ABOUT me, why don’t you come talk TO me? You seem to be generating a lot of heat about the Middle East. Why be afraid of the light?”
Answering back, Carlson shared Huckabee’s post and wrote, “Thanks for this. I’d love to. We’ll reach out to your office today to set up an interview. Much appreciated.”
Carlson’s apparent eagerness to escape Israel contrasts with his enthusiasm for countries which he celebrates rather than criticizes. On Feb. 8, 2024, for example, Carlson published a more than two-hour episode featuring an interview with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, the authoritarian leader whose invasion to conquer Ukraine has now resulted in nearly 600,000 Ukrainian casualties and 1.2 million Russian soldiers’ deaths. According to reports, Carlson conducted the interview on Feb. 6 after arriving on Feb. 3.
Qatar received an enthusiastic endorsement last year from Carlson. On Dec. 7, Carlson interviewed Qatar Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani at the Doha Forum, where he revealed his plans to purchase a home in the desert monarchy known for its longstanding support of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.
“I have been criticized as being a tool of Qatar, and I just want to say, which you already know, I have never taken anything from your country and don’t plan to. I am, however, tomorrow buying a place in Qatar,” he said.
On Feb. 11, Carlson published an interview with Ron Paul, the former Texas congressman, paleo-libertarian advocate, presidential candidate, and longtime opponent of Israel who previously said that “Palestinians are virtually in a concentration camp.”
A study released in December by the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI) analyzed podcast transcripts from Carlson and fellow far-right podcast host Candace Owens, finding that both had increased their content targeting Israel in 2025.
The researchers identified April as the turning point for Carlson’s refocusing on Israel, and that “the share of negative content about Israel rose sharply from 48.9% in the previous six-month period to 70.3% over the last six months.”
Some of Carlson’s decisions last year which drew the most attention included his promotion of Nick Fuentes, the white supremacist podcaster who has praised Adolf Hitler, celebrated Hamas, and advocated rape. This provoked a revolt at the Heritage Foundation with multiple resignations after its president, Kevin Roberts, defended Carlson.
Carlson also got in on the game started by Owens of blaming Israel for the assassination of Charlie Kirk, while throwing in some traditional collective blame against Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus.
In a Jan. 30 interview with podcast host Piers Morgan, Jeremy Boreing, the co-founder and former co-CEO of The Daily Wire, explained the distinction he saw between Owens — who he had previously hired — and Carlson.
“I’d be careful not to conflate Candace Owens — who is sort of the queen of the Grift Industrial Complex — with Tucker Carlson, who — like him or leave him — is engaged in an actual political project,” Boreing said. “As far as I can tell, Tucker is trying to create a new American majority out of a sort of amalgamation of left-wing economic populism on the one hand and right-wing social populism on the other.”
Describing the scope of the two podcasters’ apparent ambitions, Boreing called Carlson “actively engaged behind the scenes at the White House and staffing decisions,” stating that “he wields his influence to try to effectuate a political end.”
In a Jan. 28 interview on the “Triggernometry” podcast, Boreing expanded on the point, saying that Carlson “is part of a small cohort of people” including the likes of Fuentes, former US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Steve Bannon, who formerly advised US President Donald Trump, in pursuing a “political project” to reshape the American political right.
Uncategorized
Madrid Museum Launches Investigation After Jewish Women Harassed, Kicked Out
Illustrative: Anti-Israel activists held a rally ahead of the game between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Real Madrid for the Turkish Airlines Euroleague, in front of the Palacio de los Deportes (Movistar Arena) in Madrid, Jan. 8, 2026. Photo: David Canales / SOPA Images via Reuters Connect
A national art museum in Madrid has launched an investigation after three elderly Jewish women — including a Holocaust survivor — who were verbally harassed over their openly displayed Jewish symbols were subsequently forced to leave, fueling criticism that the institution sided with the perpetrators rather than protecting the victims.
On Tuesday, a spokesperson for the Museum Reina Sofía told multiple news outlets that the institution would “immediately launch an independent and transparent internal investigation to clarify what happened,” formally confirming the opening of a probe as scrutiny over the incident intensified.
“The museum wishes to unequivocally express its commitment to equality, religious freedom, and zero tolerance for any type of violence or discrimination related to antisemitism,” the statement read. “The museum’s staff is highly qualified in fundamental rights, conflict management, and the prevention of any type of discrimination.”
“Once again, we would like to highlight the importance that Jewish artists, patrons, and benefactors have had for the institution and its collection, especially in the avant-garde, without whose selfless collaboration the museum as we know it today would be inconceivable,” it continued. “For all these reasons, we will not rest until the unfortunate events that have taken place are clarified.”
Footage of the incident was circulated on social media.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition in 2026, but watch Spain’s shame, as three elderly tourists, including a Holocaust survivor, are harassed & kicked out of Madrid’s state run Reina Sofia museum over Jewish symbols. Staff said visitors were ‘disturbed’ by their presence and… pic.twitter.com/XdAlSlfKzd
— Saul Sadka (@Saul_Sadka) February 16, 2026
First reported by the Spanish news outlet Okdiario, the three women were visiting the museum in central Madrid last Saturday when other visitors spotted them wearing a Star of David necklace and carrying a small Israeli flag.
At that point, a group of people started attacking them verbally, shouting antisemitic insults, and calling them “crazy child killers.”
Rather than intervening against the instigators, museum officials expelled the Israeli women, telling them to leave because “some visitors were disturbed that they are Jewish.”
A security guard also told the group to hide their Jewish symbols, insisting they could not be displayed inside the museum.
Even though one of them pointed out that Spanish law allows people to wear religious symbols and carry national flags in public institutions, they were still forcibly removed from the building despite not breaking any rules.
The Action and Communication on the Middle East (ACOM) group, a leading pro-Israel organization in Spain, announced Monday it will pursue legal action against the Museum Reina Sofía “for discrimination and possible promotion of hatred from a public institution.”
“The legal action will be directed both at the institution and its top official, the museum director, Manuel Segade,” ACOM wrote in a post on X, adding that the museum’s actions reflect “a persistent pattern of using political agendas, engaging in discrimination, and promoting narratives of hate against the State of Israel and the Jewish-Israeli community from a publicly funded institution.”
“A public institution should never be used as a platform for sectarian activism,” the statement continued.
As a state-affiliated cultural institution under Spain’s Culture Ministry, the Reina Sofía is internationally recognized as one of the country’s leading contemporary art museums.
In the past, the museum has also faced criticism for hosting anti-Israel demonstrations and presenting an exhibition titled “From the River to the Sea,” a popular slogan among pro-Palestinian activists that has been widely interpreted as a genocidal call for the destruction of the Jewish state, which is located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Like most countries across Europe and the broader Western world, Spain has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents over the last two years, in the wake of the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Still, Spain stands out as one of the most extreme cases, with experts warning that antisemitic violence and anti-Zionist rhetoric have moved beyond a social phenomenon to, in many instances, being state-promoted and legitimized as a political tool.
In particular, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and several members of his left-wing party have come under mounting criticism from some of the country’s political and Jewish leaders, who accuse them of fueling antisemitic hostility.