Uncategorized
Will Israel Return to War in Gaza?
Kibbutz member Yael Raz Lachyani, 49, walks by the fence of Kibbutz Nahal Oz in southern Israel, Oct. 28, 2025. Hamas gunmen killed 15 people from Nahal Oz and took eight more hostage to Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Before beginning my “deep dive” into Gaza, here’s the long and short of it:
- Israel, the United States, and Arab powers in the region all want the war in Gaza to end; but
- every element of peace, including international stabilization forces and reconstruction is impossible until Hamas disarms and dismantles its power structure; and
- Hamas is ideologically incapable of doing so voluntarily.
All of this leads to an inescapable conclusion: the path to peace may very well lie on the other side of renewed combat.
Here’s the full story:
US President Donald Trump, speaking before the Israeli Knesset on October 13, announced the end of the war in Gaza and the “historic dawn of a new Middle East.”
All remaining live Israeli hostages held by Hamas returned home, and the Israeli people responded with an elation that continues to this day. Yet that euphoric moment marked only the beginning of a train of problems, obstacles, and deadly battles that seem to be growing only worse over time.
This doesn’t mean the end of Trump’s self-named “Great Peace,” but merely the beginning of a very Middle Eastern process.
During the two weeks since Trump’s declaration of peace, Hamas failed to return the bodies of many of the deceased hostages as it had agreed to, launched attacks against IDF positions resulting in several injuries and deaths, and brutally executed dozens of Palestinians, many of them publicly, while blindfolded and kneeling in the street.
For its part, Israel responded with limited but severe air strikes. Nonetheless Trump, Israel and Hamas all continue to insist that a ceasefire is still in effect, a sentiment that Trump summed up succinctly, “They [Hamas] killed an Israeli soldier. So the Israelis hit back. And they should hit back… Nothing is going to jeopardize the ceasefire.”
So it seems we have a ceasefire – but one that includes, well … firing.
Given how the Middle East works, returning to combat may actually be a necessary step toward achieving genuine, regional peace.
Trump’s “Great Peace,” aka “the Deal,” is meant to occur in two phases. Phase 1 involves:
- an immediate ceasefire,
- the return of all Israeli hostages (living and dead),
- a partial pullback of IDF forces, and finally, the release of nearly 2,000 Palestinian security prisoners from Israeli jails, including many convicted and high ranking terror operatives.
Phase 2, which has yet to be fully negotiated, is meant to include:
- Hamas completely disarming and giving up control over Gaza,
- further IDF withdrawals,
- and the implementation of some kind of international governing force that will oversee reconstruction.
Strictly speaking, we are still in Phase 1: Israel has fulfilled its obligations, but Hamas continues to hold the bodies of deceased Israeli hostages, which is of high emotional importance to Israelis. Hamas insists that the bodies are hard to find, yet Israeli intelligence claims that the terror organization has custody of most of the remains. The Israeli claim was evidenced the other day by drone footage which showed Hamas operatives removing an Israeli body from a building, burying it under rubble, and then calling the Red Cross to report their “discovery.”
Trump threatened on October 25 to take some kind of action against Hamas if it did not return the Israeli bodies within 48 hours, yet that deadline has passed, and bodies continue to return only in a trickle.
Phase 1 problems notwithstanding, the disarmament of Hamas presents a critical barrier to Phase 2.
In the wake of October 7, 2023, the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, Israel will not tolerate a Hamas controlled enclave on its border. In a further obstacle, neither neighboring Arab countries nor local Palestinian clans will take responsibility for Gaza’s future if that means having to fight against an armed and active Hamas.
Yet the terror group is already refusing to disarm, saying (at best) that the agreement is ambiguous, and in some cases, expressing outright refusal.
Both Jerusalem and Washington seem quite aware of this sticking point: speaking from the White House last month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed disarmament with the warning, “This can be done the easy way or it can be done the hard way, but it will be done.”
President Trump later echoed the sentiment more bluntly, saying, “If Hamas continues to kill people in Gaza, which was not the Deal, we will have no choice but to go in and kill them.” Trump added further threats against the terror group in recent days, including, “If they don’t disarm, we will disarm them. And it will happen quickly and perhaps violently.”
Some headlines claimed that the United States is pressuring Israel against violating the ceasefire, including comical terms like “Bibi-sitting,” yet the rhetoric coming out of Washington is actually far more aggressive than that coming from Jerusalem. According to non-public sources inside the Israeli government, much of the pressure against resuming combat stems not from America, but from Israel’s desire to return the remains of as many deceased hostages as possible before engaging in an operation that might put them forever beyond reach.
Indeed, events on the ground seem to demonstrate a high degree of coordination between the two countries — a coordination based on the shared understanding that peace requires appropriate enforcement, and that it may prove impossible to remove Hamas’ influence by any means other than combat.
There is precedent for this approach.
Beginning with the famous “pager” operation last year, Israel conducted a series of strikes that devastated the Hezbollah terror organization in Lebanon, finally resulting in a November 2024 “ceasefire” agreement. Under the terms of this “ceasefire,” Israel retained the right to continue firing against Hezbollah as necessary, and has carried out several hundred strikes since that time. Both the government of Lebanon as well as the United States have generally accepted these strikes as being not only consistent with the ceasefire agreement, but also a necessary step toward building a peaceful Lebanese government, safe from Hezbollah’s violent control.
Another example began last April, when Trump gave Iran a 60 day deadline to negotiate the dismantling of its nuclear program. The deadline expired on June 11, and was followed immediately by a devastating Israeli air operation, which culminated in the famous American B-2 bombardment of Iran’s most deeply buried nuclear facilities. The result was a quick and decisive end to what Trump named “The Twelve Day War,” followed by a period of sustained quiet, though Iran is rumored to be rebuilding its capabilities.
The current phase in Gaza is reminiscent of the 60 day Iran negotiation: there is a slim possibility that Hamas might agree to disarm and depart peacefully, but if not, the parties have been clear that combat remains not only an option, but a functional tool for achieving eventual peace.
It is relatively rare that an aggressive dictatorship transforms into a safe and prosperous neighbor, but there are at least two historical examples: Germany and Japan after World War II. In both cases, the previous regime had to be completely defeated and entirely disarmed before reconstruction, much less any hope of a better future. Can one imagine that today’s prosperous, modern Germany would exist if the allies had given the Nazis a role in reconstruction? Can one imagine international partners physically entering Germany to help govern and rebuild, while under the threat of an armed and active Nazi regime?
Until October 13, Hamas held living Israeli hostages — they were enduring abuse, starvation, and rapidly running out of time. Under these circumstances, Israel entered a deal to return the live hostages immediately, while delaying the deconstruction of Hamas, and the reconstruction of Gaza, until later. Yet in many other respects, the situation in Gaza parallels post-war Germany: before the region can hope to imagine a better future, the existing regime must be disarmed, dismantled, and dismissed. The fate of the entire Middle East, and Trump’s “Great Peace,” depend on it.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
Uncategorized
With the last hostage released, is American Jewish unity over?
When the remains of the last Israeli hostage in Gaza returned to Israel this week, Scott Spindel, a lawyer in Encino, Calif., finally took off the thick steel dog tag he had put on after the Hamas attack of Oct. 7, 2023.
His friend Lauren Krieger, an orthopedic surgeon, did the same. And he pulled down the last of the names of the hostages remaining in Gaza that his wife, Jenn Roth Krieger, had placed in the window of their Santa Monica home.
During the nearly 28 months that Israeli hostages remained in captivity in Gaza, Krieger, 61, and Spindel, 55, consistently argued over Israel’s war in the strip.
“Lauren would say that we probably were a little too extreme,” Spindel, whose daughter serves in the IDF, told me in a telephone interview. “I don’t think we blew up enough buildings.”
But those differences paled beside their mutual concern over the fate of the hostages.
“Unfortunately,” said Spindel, “it took tragedy to pull us together.”
So it was across the American Jewish landscape. Then, the body of Staff Sergeant Ran Gvili, the 24-year-old Israeli police officer killed on Oct. 7 and taken by Hamas terrorists back into the enclave, was returned to Israel — the last of the hostages to come home.
Jews from across the political spectrum unpinned yellow ribbon buttons from their lapels, removed the hostage posters from their synagogues, and folded up and put away the blue-and-white flags displayed as a symbol of the missing Israelis.
The marches and vigils American Jews held on behalf of the hostages — small but meaningful echoes of the mass rallies that roiled Israel — came to a quiet halt.
Jewish unity is forged in adversity. Without it, we are apt to find enemies among ourselves. And as painful as the hostage saga was, it unified an otherwise fractious American Jewish community in a time of crisis.
Without that common concern, are even deeper rifts our future?
“As committed and connected as we were,” said Spindel, “it doesn’t change the fact that we also were still divided about solutions.”
A family in distress
Across the United States, synagogues of all religious and political bents regularly joined in the same Acheinu prayer for the release and return of the hostages.
“Our family, the whole house of Israel, who are in distress,” the prayer begins — a wholly accurate summation of the totality of Jewish concern.
Surveys showed that the hostages unified American Jews even when Israel’s Gaza campaign divided them. An October 2025 Washington Post poll found that a plurality of American Jews disapproved of Israel’s military actions in Gaza — but a whopping 79% said they were “very concerned” about the hostages.
There have been other moments in recent Jewish history when calamity created unity. The 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, for instance, brought together the vast majority of American Jews in mourning, even those who opposed his policies.
And, of course the brutal Oct. 7 attack, which claimed almost 1,200 lives, created a near-universal sense of shock and sorrow.
But the hostage crisis may have had an even deeper emotional — and perhaps political — impact.
“Even for people who were not affiliated Jewishly, those hostages struck a deep, deep chord,” Krieger told me. “It felt personal. I don’t think we’ve had that level of collective trauma in our lifetimes in that same way.”
And a family divided
The hostage crisis bonded American Jews to one another, and to their Israeli counterparts, at a time when enormous political rifts were opening within their communities.
In the U.S., as in Israel, there were sharp disagreements over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conduct of the war and whether he was even prioritizing the hostages’ safety.
And the encampments and protests against the war at college campuses — in which many Jewish students participated, and to which many others objected — created even deeper divisions over support for the Jewish state.
But if the hostage issue didn’t erase such differences, it muted them. Krieger and Spindel could frustrate each other in conversations about the conduct of the war, or American support for it. But in the end, they were both in that 79% that the Washington Post poll identified.
What will hold them — and the rest of us — together, now?
The hostage crisis provided something history unfortunately bestows upon Jews with regularity: an external enemy that transcended ideological differences. With it gone, American Jews return to what they’ve always been — a community bound by tradition, and riven by politics.
Krieger and Spindel have already resumed their arguments. But even though the dog tags are gone, they’re both still wearing Jewish stars on silver chains around their necks. When someone admires Krieger’s, he takes it off and gives it to them. He buys his metal stars in bulk on Amazon, and has given away dozens since Oct. 7.
“I want people to feel like I do,” he said, “like we’re a peoplehood worth cherishing.”
Worth cherishing — even though we can’t agree on much else.
The post With the last hostage released, is American Jewish unity over? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Iran President Says Trump, Netanyahu, Europe Stirred Tensions in Protests
Amnesty International Greek activists and Iranians living in Athens hold candles and placards in front of the Greek Parliament to support the people of Iran, in Athens, Greece, January 30, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Louisa Gouliamaki TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Saturday that US, Israeli and European leaders had exploited Iran’s economic problems, incited unrest and provided people with the means to “tear the nation apart” in recent protests.
The two-week long nationwide protests, which began in late December over an economic crisis marked by soaring inflation and rising living costs, have abated after a bloody crackdown by the clerical authorities that US-based rights group HRANA says has killed at least 6,563, including 6,170 protesters and 214 security forces.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told CNN Turk that 3,100, including 2,000 security forces, had been killed.
The US, Israeli and European leaders tried to “provoke, create division, and supplied resources, drawing some innocent people into this movement,” Pezeshkian said in a live state TV broadcast.
US President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced support for the demonstrators, saying the US was prepared to take action if Iran continued to kill protesters. US officials said on Friday that Trump was reviewing his options but had not decided whether to strike Iran.
Israel’s Ynet news website said on Friday that a US Navy destroyer had docked at the Israeli port of Eilat.
Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Europeans “rode on our problems, provoked, and were seeking — and still seek — to fragment society,” said Pezeshkian.
“They brought them into the streets and wanted, as they said, to tear this country apart, to sow conflict and hatred among the people and create division,” Pezeshkian said.
“Everyone knows that the issue was not just a social protest,” he added.
Regional allies including Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia have been engaging in diplomatic efforts to prevent a military confrontation between Washington and Tehran.
The US is demanding that Iran curb its missile program if the two nations are to instead resume talks, but Iran has rejected that demand.
Foreign Minister Araqchi said in Turkey on Tuesday that missiles would never be the subject of any negotiations.
In response to US threats of military action, Araqchi said Tehran was ready for either negotiations or warfare, and also ready to engage with regional countries to promote stability and peace.
“Regime change is a complete fantasy. Some have fallen for this illusion,” Araqchi told CNN Turk. “Our system is so deeply rooted and so firmly established that the comings and goings of individuals make no difference.”
Uncategorized
CBS News Chief Weiss Touts Commentator Push, Draws Mixed Reaction in Newsroom
FILE PHOTO: Bari Weiss speaks at the 2022 Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California, U.S., May 3, 2022. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo
Three months into her tenure, CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss presented a vision this week to revitalize the nearly century-old broadcaster, in part by applying the same formula that fueled the rise of The Free Press – recruiting commentators who offer observations about news, politics and culture.
From adding 19 new commentators, including some drawn from The Free Press ranks, to introducing new podcasts, newsletters and live events, employees were variously energized or skeptical of the ideas presented by CBS’ new boss. Weiss’ notions about how to thrive in a post-Walter Cronkite era struck some as in conflict with the stated mission of doing great journalism, according to seven current and former CBS News employees and industry insiders.
In her presentation, Weiss also envisioned a galaxy of cross-platform stars, like New York Times columnist and CNBC host Andrew Ross Sorkin, whom she highlighted with a meme: “Sorkining.” The Dealbook founder is the author of several business books, executive producer of the Showtime series “Billions,” and maestro of the New York Times premiere live event, and a Davos fixture.
“It’s like saying ‘Hey, Hollywood. Why can’t you just be like Leonardo DiCaprio?’ If people knew how to bottle that magic and make someone a star, they would do it,” said a former CBS employee.
An industry veteran said the idea suggested a lack of appreciation for the power of television, which has been making stars for generations: among them “CBS Evening News” anchors Dan Rather, Connie Chung, Walter Cronkite and Katie Couric.
The 41-year-old Weiss, who has no broadcast experience and has been described as a distant leader by six current and former CBS News sources, now has to deliver on her promise of capturing new and younger viewers – including political independents who don’t see themselves reflected in mainstream media. It is a daunting undertaking that has hobbled executives across broadcast and cable, including former CNN chief Chris Licht, ousted in June 2023.
One supporter sees the charismatic Weiss as a modern-day Katharine Graham, the legendary publisher of the Washington Post, who was undermined by underlings when she took over in 1963. Graham transformed the paper and led it through its Watergate-era heyday, and generally left editorial decisions to Executive Editor Ben Bradlee.
A current staffer, speaking on background, said, “People are saying, ‘Let’s give her a chance’ … I want to see her succeed. If she succeeds, we all succeed.”
CBS News and Weiss did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
PRIORITIES FOR CBS NEWS
Weiss, a former opinion journalist and media entrepreneur, joined CBS after parent Paramount owner David Ellison bought her five-year-old media company, The Free Press, for $150 million in October.
Some see Weiss’ playbook of expanding CBS’s journalism ranks with commentators as conflicting with other initiatives including breaking news and landing deep investigative stories, according to three current and former CBS News staffers and an industry veteran.
“There’s nothing wrong with that,” said the former employee. “But is that what a news division is or are they craving something completely different? That’s fine but don’t pretend it’s a news division.”
Another current CBS News staffer talked about past failures to capitalize on new ways of reaching the audience, such as leveraging the power of the Paramount+ streaming service to promote news shows, observing, “We have done a wretched job of being on the internet.”
Weiss is also attempting to change the news network’s political orientation, appealing to a wider cross-section of Americans, according to her remarks Tuesday. Weiss said she wants CBS News to reflect the friction animating the national conversation.
In broadening its perspective to include more diverse viewpoints, CBS News could ultimately lay claim to the uncharted ground for a center-right broadcaster, said Integrated Media Chief Executive Jonathan Miller, a veteran media executive who has held senior positions at News Corp and AOL.
“We need to commission and greenlight stories that will surprise and provoke – including inside our own newsroom,” Weiss said in her address to employees. “We also have to widen the aperture of the stories we tell.”
On that front, CBS has had mixed results so far. Earlier this month, “CBS Evening News” broadcast a widely panned segment featuring U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in various meme-like situations, saluting him as “the ultimate Florida man.”
EARLY SUCCESSES
It has also seen successes, including Lesley Stahl’s interview with Trump son-in-law and Middle East advisor Jared Kushner and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, within a week of brokering a peace deal between Israel and Hamas, and Norah O’Donnell’s “60 Minutes” interview with Trump. Paramount paid Trump $16 million to settle a lawsuit over its editing of an interview with his White House rival, former Vice President Kamala Harris.
It landed journalistic scoops, including interviewing the man who charged one of two gunmen who attacked a Jewish community gathering in Sydney, and exclusive video of Alex Pretti, the man killed by Border Patrol in Minneapolis, reading a tribute to a veteran who died in 2024.
Weiss announced that the network would bring in contributors with expertise in politics, health, happiness, food and culture, whom she encouraged staffers to use on-air. The roster includes Free Press columnist Niall Ferguson of the conservative Hoover Institution, as well as Casey Lewis, a former Teen Vogue and MTV editor who writes about youth culture.
“It’s great to have younger people, a diverse demographic and diverse ideology represented,” said Kathy Kiely, the chair in Free-Press Studies at the Missouri School of Journalism. “Newsrooms can’t do a good job unless we have that diversity in our ranks. What worries me is the emphasis on opinion over primary-sourced, reported facts.”
Weiss emphasized making content available online before it airs on TV to reach more viewers. CBS has long been in third place behind rivals ABC and NBC and, like most mainstream media, is struggling with audience declines as consumers migrate to social platforms.
Pew Research estimates about one-third of all adults get at least some news from podcasts. CBS News does not appear among Spotify’s or Apple’s rankings of the top 50 news podcasts.
One former employee expects the digital-first goal to be complicated because CBS hasn’t devoted sufficient resources to helping correspondents or anchors curate their social media presence or re-edit television interviews for YouTube or streaming.
Weiss encouraged staffers to think of the news organization as the best-capitalized media startup in the world.
“We are in a position, with the support of all of the leadership of this company, to really make the change we need.”