Palestinian Journalists Attacked – By Whom? - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

by Khaled Abu Toameh

..the only Palestinian journalists who were free to operate in the Gaza Strip for nearly the past two decades were those working for Qatar's Al-Jazeera (Arabic) television empire, serving as Hamas's unofficial mouthpiece, or those whose reporting was limited to attacking and smearing Israel.

 

• Reporters Without Borders also ignored allegations that many of the Palestinian journalists targeted by the Israel Defense Forces were affiliated with Hamas and other terror groups.

• The silence of the international community has empowered Hamas to get rid of most of its political critics, as well as journalists who dared to criticize the terror group and its leaders. Consequently, the only Palestinian journalists who were free to operate in the Gaza Strip for nearly the past two decades were those working for Qatar's Al-Jazeera (Arabic) television empire, serving as Hamas's unofficial mouthpiece, or those whose reporting was limited to attacking and smearing Israel.

• Several international news agency journalists received telephone threats and warnings against covering Hamas' suppression of the protests.

• Those who continue to ignore Hamas atrocities and human rights abuses against Palestinians are doing a great disservice to the Palestinians: they are allowing Hamas to get away with its crimes against its own people.

A global media campaign of more than 150 outlets from 70 countries, coordinated by a group called Reporters Without Borders, pointed an accusing finger at Israel and ignored allegations that many of the Palestinian journalists targeted by the IDF were affiliated with Hamas and other terror groups. Pictured: Reporters Without Borders director general Thibaut Bruttin delivers a speech during a demonstration in Paris, on September 26, 2024. (Photo by Thomas Samson/AFP via Getty Images)

A recent international campaign to express solidarity with Palestinian journalists in the Gaza Strip has pointed an accusing finger at Israel, while ignoring the suffering they have experienced under Hamas's rule during the past two decades.

The global media campaign of more than 150 outlets from 70 countries, coordinated by a group called Reporters Without Borders, also ignored allegations that many of the Palestinian journalists targeted by the Israel Defense Forces were affiliated with Hamas and other terror groups.

Since its brutal and bloody takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, Hamas has been waging a systematic campaign to silence its critics, including journalists who do not toe the line. We have not seen any global protests against Hamas's crackdown.

The silence of the international community has empowered Hamas to get rid of most of its political critics, as well as journalists who dared to criticize the terror group and its leaders. Consequently, the only Palestinian journalists who were free to operate in the Gaza Strip for nearly the past two decades were those working for Qatar's Al-Jazeera (Arabic) television empire, serving as Hamas's unofficial mouthpiece, or those whose reporting was limited to attacking and smearing Israel.

Some Palestinian human rights and media organizations did speak out against Hamas's clampdown on journalists and the absence of a free media in the Gaza Strip. These voices, however, rarely made it to the pages of major newspapers in the US, Canada or Europe. Some foreign journalists were aware that their Palestinian colleagues were facing a brutal campaign of intimidation by Hamas but chose to look the other way. Many foreign journalists only want stories that reflect negatively on Israel.

As early as 2019, the Chairman of the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS), Nasser Abu Bakr, remarked that Hamas's attacks on Palestinian journalists and the arrest of hundreds of them is "a dangerous development in terms of numbers and quality, and a dangerous indicator of an ISIS-like mindset that does not believe in freedom of the media."

He further revealed that since Hamas's takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, PJS had documented 500 violations against journalists by Hamas.

According to Abu Bakr, the real number of Palestinian journalists arrested by Hamas "exceeds what has been documented, because some of them fear for their lives and the lives of their children if they speak out, for fear of being attacked by Hamas militias."

Following are some Palestinian journalists arrested by Hamas in recent years. Their cases have been largely ignored by mainstream media in the West.

Hani al-Agha. According to the PJS, regarding just the last time he was last arrested in 2019: "Al-Agha is being held in poor conditions inside the [Hamas] Internal Security Forces prison west of Gaza, despite his suffering and deteriorating health as a result of a previous spinal surgery."

The Palestinian syndicate condemned the [Hamas] Interior Ministry for refusing to acknowledge the presence of journalists in its prisons and refusing to reveal the reason for al-Agha's arrest. "This is a clear violation of the Palestinian Basic Law and applicable Palestinian laws," the group added. It called on the General Union of Arab Journalists and the International Federation of Journalists to pressure Hamas to release al-Agha and halt its security crackdown on media professionals and journalists in the Gaza Strip.

Mohammed al-Louh, a reporter for Al-Sha'ab radio, was arrested in 2020 from his home in Nusseirat. It is not clear what the charges were against him.

Hamza Hammad, a freelance journalist. In 2019, the Hamas government's Internal Security Service arrested Hammad without providing any reasons. His brother, Mohammed, told a Sky News reporter: "At six o'clock on Sunday evening, a security force raided the home of one of Hamza's friends while he was there. They arrested him and a number of his friends without identifying themselves or giving any reasons for the arrest of those present in the house. They took my brother to an unknown location at first, but after hours of communicating with the security services, we learned that he was being held by the Internal Security Service. They did not allow us to visit him or find out the reason for his arrest."

Ahmed Saeed was arrested by Hamas in 2022 after preparing a report on the migration of young people from the Gaza Strip and their drowning at sea on death boats. The report held Hamas responsible for this migration. Hamas police officers raided Saeed's home of while he was broadcasting live. The PJS denounced the arrest of Saeed. They stated that it came during a Hamas campaign of intimidation and threats against Palestinian journalists.

Hani Abu Rizeq was arrested by Hamas in 2022. His family said that he worked on "humanitarian stories" of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. They said he was arrested after he published a story about a Gaza resident, Abu Al-Saeed al-Masri, who was displaced with his family after his house and furniture were destroyed by Hamas police officers. The attack on al-Masri came after he reportedly refused to sell his house to a Hamas-affiliated businessman.

Amer Abu Shabab. He was arrested in 2017after Hamas officers searched his house and seized his personal computer and cellular phone.

Taghreed Abu Dhareefa, TV reporter, was arrested in 2017 on charges of "communicating with [the Palestinian Authority]." The PJS said about her that it "views with extreme concern the actions taken by Hamas against a journalist based on flimsy, unacceptable and absolutely rejected pretexts and accusations, as they are a violation of the Palestinian Basic Law. In addition, her detention has been extended by a military court in flagrant violation of the Palestinian Basic Law, which guarantees journalists the right to communicate with their sources of information and the media outlets they work for."

Hajar Harb, an investigative reporter, was also arrested by Hamas in 2017 for reporting about corruption in Hamas-controlled ministries. She was later put on trial and sentenced to six months in prison and a 1,000 shekels ($250) fine. The PJS condemned the "unjust ruling" and considers it a dangerous precedent. It called on Hamas to rescind it, as it constitutes a clear violation of freedom of opinion and expression and the freedom to obtain and disseminate information.

Many other Palestinian journalists were arrested or threatened by Hamas for covering anti-Hamas protests that erupted throughout the Gaza Strip between 2017 and 2019. They include: Nasr Abu Foul, Hazem Madi, Ahmed Qudaih, Osama Abu Sakran, Rafat al-Qudra, Moeen Farajallah, Matar al-Zaq, Osama Kahlout, Sameh al-Jadi, and Sami Issa.

Several international news agency journalists received telephone threats and warnings against covering Hamas' suppression of the protests. Journalist Mohammed Abu Shaar, a correspondent for several local websites, said he received a telephone threat from a Hamas officer who identified himself as Abu Ahmed. Abu Shaar added that Abu Ahmed called him a "spy" for Israel.

The Palestinian Authority Ministry of Information condemned Hamas's attacks on journalists as "the work of gangs, a violation of all our national, moral, and religious norms, an attempt to tarnish our people's image in the eyes of the world, and a denial of the sacrifices of martyrs and prisoners."

Such condemnations, however, have gone unnoticed by the international community. So have Hamas's recurring and systematic assaults on Palestinian journalists and public freedoms. Those who continue to ignore Hamas atrocities and human rights abuses against Palestinians are doing a great disservice to the Palestinians: they are allowing Hamas to get away with its crimes against its own people.

• Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on X (formerly Twitter) 

Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21892/palestinian-journalists-attacked

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

FBI probing whether its own agents obstructed or interfered with politically sensitive cases - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

Material evidence discovered in previously secret "prohibited access" case files raises concerns about FBI agents' abuse of authority or obstruction of investigations. Those stalled, thwarted or corrupted probes involved several potential targets, ranging from Hillary Clinton to Hunter Biden to President Trump.

 

The FBI is investigating material uncovered in “prohibited access” case files to determine whether its own agents or leaders may have obstructed criminal or congressional investigations involving major political figures such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden or their family associates, officials tell Just the News.

The inquiries have been under way for several months, the officials said, and they have turned up unusual pieces of evidence buried in digital case archives showing that, on occasion, some FBI employees memorialized concerns about conduct by FBI supervisors or case agents in politically sensitive probes. 

These writings are often called "memos to file" as insurance in case wrongdoing is discovered, the employees have some degree of deniability. 

Grand jury has been empaneled, reviewing evidence, sources say

Some of the evidence is being prepared for a bombshell notification to Congress later this month while other pieces are being reviewed by a federal grand jury, the officials said. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley in June urged the FBI to probe how the bureau under former Director James Comey used a segregated system of politically sensitive cases known as the “prohibited access” case files.

The evidence in those files spans nearly a decade and involves several major political scandals, including Russiagate, allegations of Clinton and Biden family corruption and even the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, officials said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the press.

For instance, FBI Director Kash Patel’s team recently located a document showing then-Executive Assistant Director Randall Coleman wrote a “memo to file” the day before the 2016 presidential election where Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton laying out the unusual behavior of FBI managers after fresh evidence in Clinton’s classified email scandal was discovered on former congressman Anthony Weiner’s laptop in the fall before that election.

FBI's McCabe stalled probe of how Clinton's secret emails landed on Anthony Weiner's computer

The Coleman memo makes clear that then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was briefed in detail about the discovery in late September 2016, but there was a long delay in taking any action. That delay became a major controversy in the final days of the 2016 election and the Department of Justice Inspector General two years later would excoriate FBI Director James Comey and McCabe for their handling of the entire case.

While the details of the FBI’s failures in the Clinton email case — codenamed "Midyear Exam" — have been chronicled for years by the IG and Congress, the recent discovery of Coleman’s "memo to file" has raised concerns that a senior FBI executive was so concerned about what he witnessed inside the FBI at the time he felt compelled to write a memo for the record.

Coleman’s Nov. 7, 2016 email, obtained by Just the News, details how the New York FBI’s top agent, Assistant Director Bill Sweeney, alerted leadership about the Weiner discovery and then how the FBI’s headquarters slowwalked the matter for nearly a month, prompting an awkward notification from Comey to Congress about the Weiner laptop discovery mere days before the election.

“On 09/28/2016, EAD Randall Coleman received a call from AD Bill Sweeney indicating team of Agents investigating Anthony Weiner sexting case had discovered emails relevant to Clinton email investigation,” the memo states. “AD Sweeney advised team had halted further review and would be requesting guidance from FBIHQ. EAD Coleman agreed and advised he would notify FBI General Counsel James Baker and DD Andrew McCabe."

“Coleman telephonically contacted DD McCabe at his office number to advise him of the circumstance described by AD Sweeney. DD McCabe advised he had already been made aware of matter," The memo continues. "On or about 10/03/2016, EAD Coleman verbally advised OGC Baker and Associate Deputy Director David Bowdich of the matter described by AD Sweeney in a ‘sidebar’ meeting after normal DD daily update meeting. OGC Baker advised he was not aware of the matter and would need to look into it further,” the memo added. “It was determined by DD McCabe and EAD Steinbach that any follow on investigative activity concerning the emails located on Anthony Weiner's laptop would be reviewed by the MIDYEAR investigative team."

You can read that memo here.

0.7.4595.5002.pdf

Obama's A.G. Yates on Clinton probes: "Shut it down"

Officials said Patel’s team – aided by FBI computer network managers – have located other documents that raise similar concerns about the FBI’s behavior in the email case as well as a separate criminal case pursued by three different FBI offices into pay-to-play allegations involving donations to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s family foundation and actions taken while she was President Barack Obama’s secretary of state.

Officials said the Wiener laptop evidence not only affected the Midyear Exam probe, it also included evidence key to the Clinton Foundation probes in Little Rock, Ark., New York and Washington.

Just the News reported last month a timeline uncovered by Patel’s team showed that all three FBI offices were obstructed in their efforts to probe the corruption allegations involving the Foundation. The timeline indicated that McCabe interjected himself into the decision-making of those cases and a top Obama Justice Department official ordered the probes stopped.

“Shut it down,” then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates is quoted in the FBI timeline as ordering.

Convicted former agent helped Biden-related Chinese company

A third body of evidence that the FBI began pursuing earlier this year involves disgraced former Special Agent Charles McGonigal, and possible assistance he gave to CEFC Energy, a Chinese firm with direct connections to Hunter Biden. That evidence exploded into full view last week when the DOJ Inspector General released a report.

McGonigal, the former special-agent-in-charge of the FBI Counterintelligence Division in New York, leaked information to “Person B” – an unnamed businessman who worked for the Chinese energy conglomerate CEFC – even as the FBI was secretly investigating the Chinese company, according to the new report by Acting DOJ Inspector General William M. Blier.

McGonigal was sentenced in December 2023 for money laundering related to a Russian oligarch and in February 2024 for receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from an Albanian government official. He met with prosecutors in November 2023 and “acknowledged during the proffer interview that he shared information with Person B about the CEFC investigation and anticipated arrests arising from it.”

The DOJ watchdog said that “Person B was a consultant to foreign governments and businesses on international investments, and, in addition to his work for CEFC China, Person B was a non-governmental advisor to the Prime Minister of Albania.”

The watchdog report assessed that “although the full extent of the harm from McGonigal’s leaks of sensitive investigative information to foreign subjects and targets will likely never be fully known, we determined that the impact of McGonigal’s conduct on the CEFC investigation, a significant FBI criminal investigation, was substantial.”

During that time, Hunter Biden pursued business deals in China, including with CEFC, and received millions from Chinese government-linked entities. He raked in millions thanks to these associations from 2013 to 2018. Eventually, DOJ would charge and convict Patrick Ho in 2019, a Hunter Biden associate at CEFC, with bribery and money laundering. He received a three-year sentence and was released in 2020.

CEFC was a multibillion-dollar Chinese conglomerate founded by Ye Jianming, a Chinese Communist Party-linked business tycoon who subsequently disappeared in China but with whom Hunter Biden had attempted to work out numerous deals. Chinese state-run media identified Ye's involvment in a corruption case in 2018, after which he disappeared. China allowed CEFC to go bankrupt.

Hunter Biden's associated businesses are also believed to have received $5 million or more in payments from CEFC in 2017 and 2018, and Ye Jianming’s deputy, Patrick Ho, also agreed to pay Hunter Biden a $1 million legal retainer after Ho was arrested. Ho agreed to the $1 million retainer with Hunter Biden for “counsel to matters related to U.S. law and advice pertaining to the hiring and legal analysis of any U.S. law firm or lawyer,” according to an “attorney engagement letter” located on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

The first call Ho reportedly made after his arrest in late 2017 was to Joe Biden’s brother, James, who has said he thought the call was meant for Hunter. Ho had tried reaching out for help because Hunter Biden agreed to represent him as part of his efforts to work out a liquefied natural gas deal worth tens of millions of dollars.

Files related to FBI's targeting Trump for fake Russian collusion were hidden away

FBI officials told Just the News they have also found extensive documents in the “prohibited access” files involving the now discredited Russiagate probe targeting President Trump and his aides.

In his letter to DOJ and FBI in June, Grassley said he feared the “prohibited access” system may have allowed the FBI to thwart congressional oversight or keep agents from discovering relevant evidence in criminal cases.

“As I’m sure you are aware, the impact of parking records in a way that impedes, or in some cases prevents, responsive records from being produced to Congress pursuant to a valid request and during the course of court litigation, whether criminal or civil, is wide-ranging and potentially catastrophic to constitutional requirements,” Grassley wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Patel. “Indeed, if the FBI has failed to take steps in the past to access records in ‘Restricted’ or ‘Prohibited’ status, the FBI has not fully responded to many years of my oversight requests.” 

You can read that letter here.

grassley_to_doj_fbi_-_prohibited_access_walter_giardina.pdf

 

John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/mondirty-cops-fbi-probes-whether-own-agents-obstructed-politically

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump’s New War Production Board? - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

Trump is enlisting tech titans to secure U.S. dominance in AI, biotech, and national security—reviving a modern-day War Production Board for the 21st century.

 

The left weighs in on anything that Trump is against, which drives it to lionize criminals like Abrego Garcia, champion open borders, and oppose increased oil and natural gas production. And they are against anything Trump is for. So often, they did not care much about big-city crime rates, supported biological men’s usurpation of women’s sports, and opposed taking out the Iranian nuclear threat.

However, recently, some former and, no doubt, current Trump opponents now seem to support both what Trump is for and what he is against—at least in a few areas. So this past week, Donald Trump hosted some of the richest, most powerful—and most liberal—high-tech CEOs in the country at the White House.

Their shared goal ostensibly is to ensure U.S. dominance in artificial intelligence, robotics, genetic engineering, cryptocurrency, and nearly every other breakthrough field that has both sparked global competition and involves U.S. national security.

In this regard, Trump seems to be channeling Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who, during the early years of World War II, enlisted his ideological foes, mostly the nation’s CEOs, to rearm the virtually defenseless U.S. He tasked them to jump-start the moribund American economy to produce in a matter of months the best and most plentiful ships, planes, vehicles, communications, and new military technologies.

Despite their ideological differences, both FDR and Trump knew that only private enterprise could rearm and reboot the nation, and only if the captains of industry were infused with patriotic zeal, guaranteed freedom to innovate and adapt, and able to make a profit on their investments, would they become partners with and not adversaries of the government.

So last week, Trump assembled Michael Kratsios, the administration’s director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, along with David Sacks, the billionaire investor and Trump’s cryptocurrency and AI czar. Joining them were Big Tech CEOs like Google’s Sundar Pichai, Arvind Krishna of IBM, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, Apple CEO Tim Cook, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Elon Musk was not there, though he said he was invited but had a scheduling conflict.

Their joint challenge is to ensure that the U.S. dominates these emerging fields and thereby ensure American prosperity and national security.

A subtext follows that China must not be allowed by hook or crook to steal U.S. research and development breakthroughs and thereby take a lead in these fields. The CEOs are tasked with investing their huge profits inside the United States to ensure jobs for Americans and, to the greatest degree, minimize offshoring and outsourcing whenever possible.

Trump’s duty, in turn, is to reassure the CEOs that under his watch, the government will not pick winners and losers but let them all compete on a level playing field. They will be protected by the government both from European Union ankle-biting regulatory interference and censorship and Washington’s own efforts to micromanage them into stasis. That is the quid. The quo is that the tech leaders must awaken a somnolent U.S. to the technological revolutions underway that will determine the fate of nations in the second half of the 21st century—and then begin producing state-of-the-art products that lead to a more secure and richer U.S.

We should remember what FDR accomplished. World War II broke out on September 1, 1939, when Germany invaded Poland. At that point, the U.S. military was smaller than those of eighteen other nations. The U.S. Army was less than 200,000 soldiers in size, with only 125,000 sailors in the Navy. In contrast, the German military was already over 1.5 million strong. Its soon-to-be wartime ally, Japan, had under arms 2.5 million combatants, and Italy had another 1.5 million soldiers.

On maneuvers, the American army was short on rifles and used broomsticks. Even after Pearl Harbor, the U.S. lacked both the quality and quantity of German planes, tanks, and artillery. The Japanese Navy roughly matched the American but enjoyed advantages since it was not responsible for a two-ocean deployment, as were the Americans in both the Atlantic and Pacific. Its fighters, torpedoes, and destroyers were deemed superior to their American counterparts.

Yet when the war ended four years later, the U.S. military was well over 12 million soldiers in size. Its navy had more ships and tonnage than all the navies of the world combined.

The U.S. Army Air Forces were larger than all the air forces of the world combined. It possessed the most lethal weapons of the war—the atomic bomb, the massive B-29 bomber, and an array of thousands of superb fighter planes. The Navy grew to over 125 fleet, light, and escort aircraft carriers. At the end of the war, American battleships, carriers, submarines, fighter aircraft, and transport vehicles were the most numerous and best in the world. By 1945, the American gross domestic product was likewise larger than all the economies of all the belligerents combined.

How did the U.S. go from an isolationist and disarmed country mired still in the Great Depression to the most powerful and best-armed nation in world history—and in less than four years?

The neo-socialist president Franklin Delano Roosevelt pivoted. He abandoned the New Deal statist control of the economy and instead unleashed the captains of industry to rearm the United States in the way that they thought best.

FDR tasked General Motors president William Knudsen to round up corporate CEOs, allot them areas of industry, and then, with Roosevelt’s blessing, turn them loose.

Roosevelt appointed his former political enemies to a variety of boards—the War Production Board, the Office of Production Management, and the National Defense Advisory Commission. The great corporations responded. Charles Wilson of General Electric, Henry Kaiser of Kaiser Steel, and Henry Ford of the Ford Motor Company quickly built new factories or recalibrated older ones into huge weapons industries.

Soon, Henry Ford was building one B-24 bomber an hour at the huge Willow Run plant in Michigan. Kaiser launched a Liberty cargo ship every few days in his West Coast shipyards. By war’s end, the industrialists had built 300,000 planes and over 14,000 warships and cargo vessels.

Roosevelt’s message to the once-hostile industrialists was simply to employ their initiative, expertise, and resources to outproduce the enemy and to catch up and surpass their head start in the quality of arms. He gave them wide latitude to profit, fast-tracked zoning and building permits, and urged them to use their initiative and coordinate with each other. The only real order was to make better and more plentiful weapons than the Germans, Italians, and Japanese combined.

And they did just that and left a model for our own generation to follow—if it proves as publicly spirited, patriotic, united, and capable as their grandfathers who won the war.

Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004, and is the 2023 Giles O'Malley Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush, and the Bradley Prize in 2008. Hanson is also a farmer (growing almonds on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author of the just released New York Times best seller, The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation, published by Basic Books on May 7, 2024, as well as the recent  The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump, and The Dying Citizen.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2025/09/08/trumps-new-war-production-board/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

What you need to know about France's political crisis - explainer - Reuters

 

by Reuters

Politics has become increasingly fraught in France as the French Prime Minister, François Bayrou, lost a parliamentary vote.

 

French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou speaks during a debate before a confidence vote on the budget issue during an extraordinary session at the National Assembly in Paris, France, September 8, 2025.

(photo credit: REUTERS)

French Prime Minister François Bayrou lost a confidence vote in parliament on Monday, plunging the euro zone's second largest economy deeper into political crisis.

Here is what you need to know:

What happened on Monday?

Bayrou, as expected, lost the confidence vote, with 364 votes against him and 194 in his favor.

What happens next?

Bayrou will submit his resignation to President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday.

Then, it's all in Macron's hands.

French President Emmanuel Macron waits for the arrival of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to attend a Franco-German cabinet meeting in Toulon, France, August 29, 2025 (credit: REUTERS)

He has so far resisted the idea of calling a snap election and appears set on proposing a new prime minister, possibly turning to the center-left. There are no rules governing whom Macron must choose, or how quickly.

If Macron takes his time, Bayrou could stay on for now in a caretaker capacity.

The far-right National Rally and hard-left France Unbowed parties are pushing for a snap parliamentary election - and for Macron to resign.

A government source said last week Finance Minister Eric Lombard, Socialist former Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve and Court of Auditors chief Pierre Moscovici - also a long-time Socialist - were among names circulating as possible choices for the next prime minister. Other sources have mentioned Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu.

What about the protests?

Beyond the fate of the government, France faces a tense September:

- On September 10: the grassroots Bloquons Tout ("Let's block everything") movement, which has grown on social media, plans nationwide protests.

- On September 12: Fitch Ratings will review France’s credit rating. A downgrade is possible if the crisis deepens.

- On September 18: Trade unions are due to hold strikes and protests.

How did we get here?

Politics has become increasingly fraught in France since Macron bet big by calling a snap parliamentary election in 2024 which resulted in a deeply fragmented parliament.

Macron's control over parliament weakened as France's debt ballooned, in part due to his largesse during the COVID and cost-of-living crises. France is now under acute pressure to fix its finances. Public debt has climbed to 113.9% of GDP. Last year's deficit was nearly double the EU's 3% limit.

Saying tough decisions were needed, Bayrou, a veteran center-right politician and Macron's fourth prime minister since his re-election, sought to pass a budget for 2026 that would require €44 billion ($51.64 billion) in savings.

This provoked an outcry from opponents. Unable to see a path to adoption, Bayrou called a confidence vote on his fiscal strategy, in a gamble the opposition called political suicide. 

Reuters

Source: https://www.jpost.com/international/article-866799

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

High court: Haredi students with unsettled military status won't get national insurance discounts - Sarah Ben-Nun

 

by Sarah Ben-Nun

Yeshiva students who have not settled their status with the military or procured a valid exemption will not be eligible for relevant discounts on national insurance.

 

Haredim protest against the IDF draft outside Tel Hashomer recruitment base, April 28. 2025.

(photo credit: AVSHALOM SASSONI)

The High Court of Justice ruled on Monday that ultra-Orthodox (haredi) yeshiva students who have not settled their status with the military or procured a valid exemption will not be eligible for relevant discounts on national insurance. 

The ruling was handed down in a response to a petition by NGOs Israel Hofsheet and the Movement for Quality Government in Israel (MQG). The decision will kick in after a transition period - the State has 30 days to announce when that will be.

The petition argues that since the draft law expired in June 2023, there has been no legal base for exemption, and so no base either for the discounts. These, Israel Hofsheet noted, in practice, “constitute a state subsidy for unlawful draft evaders.”

MQG petitioned the court already in January, following a court ruling from June 2024, which determined that the government is not permitted to financially encourage draft evasion by granting benefits and exemptions. 

The cost to the treasury of these discounts, MQG noted, is estimated at over NIS 100m. per year - at over NIS 1,000 per student, and at a discount percentage of 67. 

POLICE CONFRONT haredi demonstrators blocking a road in Jerusalem, protesting against efforts to draft haredim into the military, earlier this month. (credit: Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

The court noted, in its decision, that the government is not permitted to financially incentivize the evasion of military service. 

“We will stop all privileges for draft evaders, even if the government continues to drag its feet. Petition after petition, all incentives for those who choose to shirk their military service during wartime will be stopped. The time for equality has come,” said Uri Keidar, Israel Hofsheet’s executive director.

Funding stops for draft dodgers yeshivot

A little over a month ago, the court ruled in favor of a different petition filed by Israel Hofsheet. It decided that the State must halt funding for ultra-Orthodox (haredi) yeshivot designated specifically for at-risk youth who don't draft to the IDF - Specifically, for the Noham institutions for disengaged youth. 

It ruled then that the funding would stop this month. 

The petition notes that many of these students are not studying Torah in a consistent manner, and often work off-the-books - in violation of the conditions for military exemption. Some NIS 35m. had been allocated by the Welfare and Social Affairs Ministry to these institutions. 

Attorney Ori Hess, who heads MQG’s economics department, said, “This is a significant victory for the principle of equality and for protecting public funds. The High Court confirmed our position that evasion of military service should not be financially rewarded. The decision will return more than 100 million shekels a year to the state treasury and strengthen the principle of equal burden. This is a good day for Israeli democracy and for every citizen who believes in social justice.” 

Sarah Ben-Nun

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-866798

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'A terrible day of bloodshed': Israeli officials mourn deaths of four Armored Corps soldiers - Yanir Yagna

 

by Yanir Yagna

Staff-Sergeant Uri Lamed, Sergeant Gadi Cotal, aged 20, and Sergeant Amit Arye Regev from Modi'in-Maccabim-Reut, were killed in a tank explosion.

 

An IDF tank amid counterterrorism operations in the Gaza Strip, May 16, 2025.

(photo credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials mourned the deaths of the four soldiers in a tank explosion in northern Gaza on Monday evening. 

Netanyahu, in a statement, said, "The entire people of Israel bows its head over the death of four Armored Corps soldiers - Staff-Sergeant Uri Lamed, Sergeant Gadi Cotal, Sergeant Amit Arye Regev, and another soldier whose name has not yet been released - who fell in battle in northern Gaza."

"My wife and I, together with all the citizens of Israel, send our condolences to the bereaved families, share in their deep sorrow, and embrace them. Our soldiers acted with courage and self-sacrifice to defeat Hamas and return all our hostages. In the spirit of their heroism, we will not relent from these missions until they are achieved," Netanyahu said. 

"I wish to embrace the bereaved families in this difficult hour and a speedy recovery to the Nahal Brigade soldier who was wounded," Defense Minister Israel Katz added.

In the statement, the defense minister wrote that he "saluted the heroic IDF soldiers who risk their lives and are now fighting bravely to bring back all the hostages and defeat the Hamas terrorist organization."

IDF soldiers operating in the northern Gaza Strip, September 5, 2025; illustrative. (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

Opposition leader and chairman of Yesh Atid, Yair Lapid, wrote, "the heart breaks again and again today." 

"Four Armored Corps soldiers fell this morning in Gaza: Staff-Sergeant Uri Lamed, Sergeant Gadi Cotal, and Sergeant Amit Arye Regev, and another soldier who has not yet been named."

"Four heroes, the best of our sons, each one a world unto himself. I share in the grief of the families and send my deepest condolences. May their memory be a blessing," Lapid said. 

Democrats chairman Yair Golan called Monday "a terrible day of bloodshed, in which ten civilians and soldiers were killed." 

"My heart breaks upon learning of the deaths of Uri Lamed, Gadi Cotal, and Amit Arye Regev, who were killed this morning in battle in northern Gaza, along with another soldier whose name has not yet been released."

"I share in the deep sorrow of the families and send my heartfelt condolences," Lapid said. 

Haim Bibas, mayor of Modi'in-Maccabim-Reut, expressed his condolences to the family of Sergeant Amit Arye Regev, residents of the city.

“Amit fell this morning in battle in northern Gaza. On behalf of the residents of Modi’in-Maccabim-Re’ut, I extend my deepest condolences to his parents, Yonatan and Yael, his siblings, Ido and Roni, and to all his family and friends. May Amit’s memory be a blessing,” Bibas wrote on Facebook.

The Jordan Valley Regional Council mourned the loss of Sergeant Gadi Cotal, stating, "With great sorrow and deep pain, the Jordan Valley Regional Council bows its head and shares in the heavy mourning of the Cotal (Ben Hamo) family after receiving the difficult news of the death of their son, Gadi."

"Sergeant Gadi, from Kibbutz Afikim, was an Armored Corps soldier who fell today in battle in Gaza. He was raised and educated in our valley and graduated from Darca Beit Yerach High School. The council and school staff are accompanying the family, the community, and the students at this difficult time. We embrace the Cotal (Ben Hamo) family and stand by them in this difficult hour,” the council wrote.

The Kibbutz Movement also mourned Cotal in a post on X/Twitter. "We wish to share in the deep sorrow of his parents, Yehuda and Andrea, and to embrace the Cotel (Ben Hamo) family, friends, and the Afikim kibbutz community.

Yanir Yagna

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-866796

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

China Forgets its Amnesia - Amir Taheri

 

by Amir Taheri

Xi is trying to end China's amnesia by reminding his people and the world that China didn't start with the 1949 Maoist outburst. He is trying to reclaim China's place as a major power, whether we like it or not.

 

• The Beijing parade had a much deeper message. Xi presented it as an homage to China's role in "defeating fascism" in World War II, thus, for the first time, joining the narrative that propelled the US, USSR, Britain and China before the Maoist regime, and France into the five leaders of the new world order via the United Nations.

• Xi is trying to end China's amnesia by reminding his people and the world that China didn't start with the 1949 Maoist outburst. He is trying to reclaim China's place as a major power, whether we like it or not. It is up to others to see it as a rival, a competitor, a partner or an enemy.

With last week's military parade, Chinese President Xi Jinping is trying to end China's amnesia by reminding his people and the world that China didn't start with the 1949 Maoist outburst. He is trying to reclaim China's place as a major power, whether we like it or not. Pictured: A CS-5000T drone rolls by during the parade in Beijing's Tiananmen Square on September 3, 2025. (Photo by Pedro Pardo/AFP via Getty Images)

This month, China hit the world headlines with two events that could change the perception of its role and place in the global system in either a negative or positive way.

The first event was the summit of the so-called Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) that brought together heads of state from 10 member nations plus another 10 wannabe members.

Russian President Vladimir Putin was among the first category, along with Indian Premier Narendra Modi, his Pakistani counterpart Shehbaz Sharif and a string of Central Asian "stans" plus Iran. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and North Korean leader Kim Jun-un were in the second category.

Western pundits saw the summit in Tianjin as an attempt at building a rival pole of power to challenge the United States and its European and Japanese allies.

They played the old tune of "a new multipolar world system," forgetting that in using the geographical metaphor, one can't have more than two poles.

Let us think out of the box and suggest that the Tianjin summit may turn out to be an example of applying the old Nixon Doctrine in a new context. The Nixon Doctrine was designed to create a new world order in which ensuring peace and security would no longer be the sole responsibility of the United States.

Under it, the US would remain committed to all its treaty obligations, notably via NATO, CENTO and SEATO, but would no longer intervene in other military conflicts with boots on the ground.

As a spin-off from that doctrine, the US imagined the creation of several "cores of stability" around one or two locally powerful nations to keep peace and security in their respective regions. Under that system, the nations included in the "core" would also be able to sort out their own differences and avoid military conflict that might lead to intervention by outside powers.

Well, the SCO under Chinese leadership could well develop into such a "core" without necessarily threatening the Western powers or Japan.

All SCO members have long-standing territorial and political disputes with deep historic roots.

So if the SCO, thanks to Chinese mediation and leadership, succeeds in sorting out those sources of tension and conflict, shouldn't Tianjin be hailed as a good example of the Nixon Doctrine in action?

A careful reading of Chinese President Xi Jinping's speech and the communiqué issued after the summit shows that China is in no way committing itself to offering military support to any SCO member that might embark on aggression against other nations. In other words, China sees the SCO as a restraining mechanism rather than a cheering chorus for expansionism and aggression.

The second event, the huge unprecedented military parade in Beijing, is also seen by many Western pundits as a sign of Xi's belligerent intentions. According to that reading, Xi wants to unseat the US as the sole guarantor of what is left of a crumbling world order.

However, a rival reading may be possible.

By showing its newly gained military might, China may well be applying for a seat at the high table. Isn't the French military parade of July 14th each year bigger than what Xi put on in Beijing? Hasn't Russia smiled with its military teeth each year in celebrating victory in World War II? Do we need to mention the military parade that President Donald Trump organized on his birthday? When a two-bit despot like Kim Jong Un is allowed his own parade, why should anyone begrudge Xi for having a bite of that apple?

The Beijing parade had a much deeper message. Xi presented it as an homage to China's role in "defeating fascism" in World War II, thus, for the first time, joining the narrative that propelled the US, USSR, Britain and China before the Maoist regime, and France into the five leaders of the new world order via the United Nations.

In other words, Xi is forgetting the amnesia imposed on China under Mao Zedong, with his notorious slogans "destroy the old to build the new" and "forget the past and imagine the future." For Mao, the regime he created in 1949 was a meteor without a past, hitting the world in its trajectory.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was designed to "wipe out the memory of the past."

Yao Wenyuan, a theoretician of that revolution, saw Communist China as "a new horn child" with no memory of what its ancestors did. Thus, pigtails were banned, Ming vases smashed, calligraphy forbidden, classical Chinese music silenced, poetry shunned as a relic of feudalism and old buildings replaced with Stalinist beehive-like blocs.

More importantly, Buddhism was repressed and Confucius transformed into an enemy of the people.

Under Mao, China's role in creating the League of Nations and later the United Nations was also forgotten, because those events happened before the Communists seized power.

Also forgotten was the heroic war that China waged against Japanese aggression before and during World War II, because that happened under Kuomintang nationalist leadership.

Maoists were not the first revolutionaries to try to inject amnesia into societies they dominated. The 18th century French revolutionaries, too, changed the calendar to start counting the time from Year 1, that is to say the time they seized power.

Xi is trying to end China's amnesia by reminding his people and the world that China didn't start with the 1949 Maoist outburst. He is trying to reclaim China's place as a major power, whether we like it or not. It is up to others to see it as a rival, a competitor, a partner or an enemy. A nation without a memory is far more dangerous than one that remembers its family story.

A word of warning, however: if mismanaged and used for nursing old resentments, historical recall could be as dangerous as amnesia.

Gatestone Institute would like to thank the author for his kind permission to reprint this article in slightly different form from Asharq Al-Awsat. He graciously serves as Chairman of Gatestone Europe. 

Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21896/china-forgets-its-amnesia

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

President Trump’s ‘Controversial’ Flag-Burning Order - Arthur Schaper

 

by Arthur Schaper

Trump’s flag-burning order sparks conservative debate, balancing free speech, incitement concerns, and new visa penalties for foreign nationals who desecrate Old Glory.

 

On August 25, 2025, President Trump signed a controversial executive order.

Of course, one could argue that every one of Trump’s orders is controversial, but I mean controversy with the MAGA world, among conservatives.

He declared that burning the American flag would be punishable by up to one year in jail.

Trump outmastered corporate media again. He put out a blanket statement that overwhelmed the left, triggering their outrage. But the precise executive order is sensible, enforcement-based, and works within legal precedent and legislative standards. The angel is in the details.

Here are the key portions worth analyzing (since too many pundits, left and right, want to complain based on the headline only):

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s rulings on First Amendment protections, the Court has never held that American Flag desecration conducted in a manner that is likely to incite imminent lawless action or that is an action amounting to “fighting words” is constitutionally protected. See Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 408-10 (1989).

The issue is incitement. That is a legitimate concern. Brandenberg v. Ohio is the more germane Supreme Court case affirming this position, which held that speech advocating immediate and imminent violence was subject to sanction.

No one wants to live in a country where willful destruction of property leads to wanton violence and destruction. These outbreaks have become all too common in Democrat-run inner cities as well as throughout Washington, DC.

The executive order doubles down on the lead-up to violence provisions:

My Administration will act to restore respect and sanctity to the American Flag and prosecute those who incite violence or otherwise violate our laws while desecrating this symbol of our country.

However, putting aside Supreme Court precedent and widespread legal, judicial, and even cultural norms that defend the desecration of our flag, the flag-burning controversy deserves renewed attention.

The American flag is not just a symbol of the United States government. It is a symbol of all our people. We are in unprecedented times, with the warfare against our nation’s creed, culture, and very character. We should not lightly or blithely tolerate such dishonor to our national emblem. The President should be commended for defending and restoring honor to every American tradition and emblem.

His opposition to the abuse of our national flag is not unique. Many countries have stricter regulations regarding the treatment of their national banner. Singapore recently enhanced penalties for such acts. Germany criminalizes the desecration of foreign emblems, too.

However, those countries don’t have a legacy of freedom, and freedom of speech is stringently curtailed. Should America limit freedoms to protect the Stars and Stripes? In 2006, the United States Senate almost passed a constitutional amendment to protect the American flag. It failed by one vote: liberal Republican Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.

One could defend criminalizing flag-burning from a responsibility perspective, too. If someone wants to engage in the civil disobedience of desecrating the flag, fine, but part of civil disobedience is suffering the consequences. Vietnam War draft dodgers burned their draft cards to protest their forced call to arms. Should they have gone to jail? Mr. Conservative (Libertarian) US Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona was appalled when President Jimmy Carter issued a blanket pardon for all draft dodgers. Of course, Goldwater’s opposition stemmed from the action of the draft dodgers, not the actual burning of their cards.

Where does one draw the line when it comes to flag-burning?

If it’s illegal to desecrate the American flag, what happens if someone burns a printed copy of the flag or simply throws it in the trash? Do we send that person to jail? Drawing a golden line invites more problems than it solves. Furthermore, ordering citizens to respect the flag does not mean that they will honor the country. They will act like petulant children told to sit down and be quiet. Many of them will quietly rebut, “Okay, I won’t burn the flag, but inside my mind, I am torching the colors!”

I don’t think we need to pass an amendment criminalizing flag burning. Even uber-leftist Charlamagne the God finds flag-burning despicable, so that gives me hope that even the liberals in our nation have not become so deranged that they would destroy our beloved banner.

If we want to restore love and respect for our country, we need to reform the institutions that have been teaching future generations to hate our country.

College campuses are notorious for flag-burning, but who is doing most of the desecration?

And that brings me to the strongest provisions of the executive order:

The Secretary of State shall deny, prohibit, terminate, or revoke visas, residence permits, naturalization proceedings … whenever there has been an appropriate determination that foreign nationals have engaged in American Flag-desecration activity under circumstances that permit the exercise of such remedies pursuant to Federal law.

Whether you have a tourist VISA, a student VISA, or an H-1B, if you burn our flag, you burn your opportunity to live and work here. There is no right to visit any nation, especially the United States. If you are an immigrant, you have to act like a guest (thank you, Gov. Schwarzenegger!), with respect, dignity, and honor for the host country and its citizens. It’s stunning that so many Americans (left and right) are defending anti-American demonstrations on college campuses from foreign nationals, including the “Palestinian” riots masquerading as protests. We give them an opportunity, and they spit in our face, burning our flag!

Foreign nationals visiting our communities, working in our businesses, or studying in our universities should honor this country, even kissing the ground they walk on. It is a privilege to be in the United States. If foreigners feel so aggrieved and entitled to burn our national emblem, deport them! I cannot believe that previous presidents have not issued similar directives.

We should not ban flag-burning per se, but law enforcement must act to prevent incitement from citizens and insolence from foreigners. I approve of President Trump’s “controversial” executive order.

Arthur Schaper

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2025/09/08/president-trumps-controversial-flag-burning-order/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

IDF strikes Hezbollah training bases in Lebanon - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

The facilities were used to train operatives and prepare attacks against IDF troops and Israel, including gunfire drills and other weapons exercises.

 

Israeli Air Force jets. Credit: Maj. Ofer via Wikimedia Commons.

The Israel Defense Forces on Monday attacked several Hezbollah targets in eastern Lebanon’s Beqaa Valley, including Radwan Force training compounds, the military said.

The facilities were used to train operatives and prepare attacks against IDF troops and Israel, including gunfire drills and other weapons exercises.

“The storage of weapons and the activities of the Hezbollah terrorist organization at these sites constitute a blatant violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon and constitute a threat to the State of Israel,” according to the statement.

“The IDF will continue to operate to remove any threat to the State of Israel and will prevent the reestablishment of the Hezbollah terrorist organization,” added the military.

On Wednesday, the Israeli Air Force killed two terrorists and struck a facility in Lebanon that violated the terms of the ceasefire, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit said. The terrorists were killed in separate aerial strikes carried out within two hours. The IDF identified one of the targets as Abd al-Manaam Musa Suwaydan, a Hezbollah operative in the Yatar municipality of Southern Lebanon.

Hours later, the IDF struck a Hezbollah site in the Ansariyah area, south of Sidon in southwestern Lebanon, “which stored engineering vehicles intended to rebuild the terrorist organization’s capabilities and support its terrorist activity.” The military also hit a Hezbollah rocket launcher in the Al-Jibbain area, in the Tyre District.

On Nov. 27, a ceasefire went into effect requiring Hezbollah to withdraw north of the Litani River. Israel and Hezbollah had maintained a tense truce in Lebanon since the end of the Second Lebanon War in 2006, until Oct. 8, 2023, when the Iranian-backed group began firing rockets into Israel in solidarity with Hamas’s invasion the previous day. Israel limited its response to Hezbollah’s attacks and evacuated roughly 60,000 Israeli residents from the border area to reduce casualties.

Last September, Israel escalated its response, killing Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah and several other high-ranking terrorists. Nearly a year of fighting devastated the group’s command structure and weapons stockpiles.

According to the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, Israel has killed about 4,150 Hezbollah terrorists since the outbreak of war in more than 15,000 strikes. Some 133 Israelis have been killed, many by the more than 4,000 rockets the group fired into Israel. 

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/idf-strikes-hezbollah-training-bases-in-lebanon/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Norway to amend 'problematic' national minority regulation following 'Post' report - exclusive - Mathilda Heller

 

by Mathilda Heller

Acknowledging the long-standing connection between Norway and its Jewish population, an amendment has been proposed.

 

The river Nid offers picturesque views in Trondheim, Norway, home to one of the northernmost Jewish communities in the world.

(photo credit: GETTY IMAGES)

In response to an article in The Jerusalem Post last week, the Norwegian government has admitted that its 2022 government regulation that changed the national minority status of many of its Jews was “problematic” and should be “formulated so that Jewish refugees who came to Norway after World War II, up until the late 1960s, and who have since become integrated into the Jewish minority, are included.”

This was stated in an official response by Local Government and Regional Development Minister Kjersti Stenseng, in which she specifically cited the Post’s article.

While Norway ratified the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in 1999, bestowing national minority status on Jews, Kvens (Norwegian Finns), Roma, Forest Finns, and Romani/Tartars, the government covertly added a new regulation to the small print of the convention on June 21, 2022 stating that “Persons who have moved to Norway after 1950, or their descendants, are not considered to belong to or constitute a national minority.”

This impacted the ability of Jewish groups in the country to obtain funding, with Jewish leaders telling the Post: “They are pulling the rug out from under our feet.”

In her response to the Post’s article, Stenseng said that the 2022 wording was designed to clarify the 2017 regulation, which stated: ‘Persons who have moved to Norway in recent times, and their descendants, are generally not considered to belong to a national minority.’

“To clarify what ‘in recent times’ meant, this was changed in the new regulation in 2022 to: ‘Persons who have moved to Norway after 1950, or their descendants, are not considered to belong to or constitute a national minority,” Stenseng added.

She however acknowledged that “the specific year has turned out to be problematic” as it excludes a significant amount of the Jewish population and their descendants who were expelled from Norway during WWII and did not return until the late 1960s.

Stenseng indicated that national minority status should apply to these individuals, as well as Jews who moved to Norway and became integrated into a national minority, for example through family formation.

However, she maintained that national minority status should be for those with “a long connection to Norway” and does not generally include persons who have moved to Norway in more recent times.

The ministry subsequently sent out a proposal for an amended regulation on Monday, stating that any adjustments will be adopted for 2026.

The suggested amendment – viewed by the Post – acknowledges that the Jewish minority has “a long-standing connection to Norway” and that the regulation will now include “descendants of an ethnic minority that has been present in Norway since the beginning of the 1900s.”

The cut-off year for later arrivals will be removed and will instead be replaced by “individuals who move to Norway and become integrated into the original national minority, for example, through family formation.”

“The wording thus includes Jews and Roma who returned to Norway or came here as refugees in the decades after World War II, and their descendants. At the same time, we wish to make it clearer that persons who have moved to Norway in recent times are, as a general rule, not to be considered as belonging to a national minority. “

Obstacles for Jewish organizations

The regulation change had been impacting Jewish organizations, which discovered they were no longer eligible for funding.

The Nordic Jewish organization Kos & Kaos applied for 2,000,000 kroner ($199,060) in operating grants from the funding scheme for national minority organizations in November 2024. The money was needed to finance two positions: administrative coordinator and project manager, Ester Nafstad of Kos & Kaos told the Post in Oslo. The organization said it had been run by voluntary efforts until then and needed these positions to achieve its goals.

The Directorate for Cultural Heritage rejected the application on January 24, 2025.

Kos & Kaos appealed the decision on February 6, emphasizing its uniqueness as the only Jewish organization outside a religious context and saying that it welcomes Jews of all backgrounds. The Local Government and Regional Development Ministry (KDD) upheld the rejection, citing the 1950 Criterion.

“This was the first we learned of the criteria change,” Hafstad said.

In response, Kos & Kaos said the criterion raised serious questions under international law, administrative law, and on principled grounds. 

Mathilda Heller

Source: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-866792

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter