Trump's messy path to peace - Ben Berkowitz, Barak Ravid

 

by Ben Berkowitz, Barak Ravid

A week after the cease-fire deal was announced, both the U.S. and Iran are pushing it to the limit.

 

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photos: Jim Watson, Ahmad Al-Rubaye, and Mohammed Huwais/AFP via Getty Images

Last Wednesday, the U.S. and Iran signed a deal to end the war.

• Since then, Iran said it was closing the Strait of Hormuz again (though it didn't in practice, per U.S. officials), Israel intermittently bombed Lebanon and President Trump threatened to seize and toll the strait, kill Iran's peace negotiators, and send Syria in to fight Hezbollah.

Why it matters: A week after the cease-fire deal was announced, both the U.S. and Iran are pushing it to the limit.

• At the same time, the two sides are meeting in Switzerland to hammer out a longer-term nuclear agreement — a sign that both sides remain engaged despite significant differences.

Zoom in: High-level talks at the Bürgenstock resort in Switzerland, which concluded early Monday morning local time, are being led for the U.S. by Vice President JD Vance, with envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.

• They ran nearly nonstop into the night and went ahead even after Iran said they were closing the strait, a U.S. diplomat said.
• Representatives from the U.S., Iran, Pakistan and Qatar appeared pleased with the talks' progress, according to the diplomat.

In a joint statement, Qatari and Pakistani mediators said "encouraging progress has been made" during the 18 hours of negotiations.

• The U.S. and Iran agreed on a roadmap for reaching a final nuclear deal within 60 days, according to the statement.

Reality check: Talks are moving forward, but U.S. intelligence is skeptical that a full nuclear deal will be finalized.

• Some officials don't believe Iran is willing to make the nuclear concessions the deal requires.

Friction points: To make the deal stick, several things need to happen fast.

• Israel and Hezbollah need to stick with a fragile ceasefire.
• Iran must continue to allow commerce to flow through the Strait of Hormuz.
• Trump himself needs to help bring the temperature down, without the near-daily threats to bomb Iran again and kill its leaders.

What we're watching: Technical teams will remain in Switzerland to continue negotiations for the rest of the week. 

Ben Berkowitz, Barak Ravid

Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/06/22/trump-iran-deal-switzerland-nuclear

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Lebanon ceasefire shows need for IDF rethink on slow war doctrine - analysis - Seth J. Frantzman

 

by Seth J. Frantzman

The slow war in Lebanon, based on a doctrine from Gaza, has resulted in leaving Hezbollah in the field just miles from Israel's northern border.

 

Smoke billows from southern Lebanon following an Israeli strike, as seen from Nabatieh, southern Lebanon, June 19, 2026.

(photo credit: REUTERS/STRINGER)

A new ceasefire in Lebanon and talk of Israel withdrawing from some areas have raised questions about the current Israeli warfighting doctrine. Israel has now been fighting a war for 989 days since October 7, 2023.

While the war was imposed on Israel by attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel has had a duty to change the situation and fight the war on Israel’s terms.

In the first months of the war, after October 7, the IDF had to respond and regroup. With 1,000 Israelis killed, 250 taken hostage, and the IDF scrambling to call up and train some 500,000 reservists, there were unprecedented strains on Israel.

However, by the time the IDF began to take the offensive against Hezbollah in September 2024, the situation had changed. Israel was now dictating the tempo on various fronts. Israel has been making its own decisions since then.

However, a recent ceasefire in Lebanon and pressure on Israel to halt its offensive operations have left many questions about what comes next. Hezbollah is still in Lebanon. It is not only present in the Beka’a and Dahiyeh, but it is also present near Israel’s border.

Supporters of Lebanon's Hezbollah wave flags while commemorating Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, May 25, 2026. (credit: REUTERS/Raghed Waked)

The Alma Research and Education Center recently put out a report about the IDF fighting Hezbollah at a key site in southern Lebanon.

“The IDF is currently conducting ground operations on the Ali al-Taher ridge against the Badr Unit’s primary underground infrastructure, located approximately 10 kilometers from the Israeli border near Metula. This facility serves as the main headquarters of the Badr Unit and, in all likelihood, can be used to launch weapons and conduct attacks into Israeli territory. The infrastructure includes several underground sub-complexes, the largest of which extends for more than one kilometer,” the report said.

Other reports have painted a concerning picture of this ridgeline. It also raises questions about why Israel waited some 900 days to take the Beaufort and then strike at this area. The IDF took the Beaufort within two days of launching operations in 1982.

Why did it take years this time?

The reason is because of a new IDF doctrine of tactics that emerged in Gaza in response to the Hamas attack. Rather than fighting the war of maneuver and combining firepower the way the Momentum plan the IDF had trained for, called for, the IDF has preferred very slow incremental advances. These advances move at a pace similar to that of a World War I battlefield, except without the high casualties.

Some may argue that it is this concern for casualties that guides the 988-day war. However, the evidence from Lebanon shows that even a slow pace carries risks.

Hezbollah will innovate, and the IDF is suffering casualties. There is no way to run a war in which there are no losses. As such, it’s not clear why it would be preferable to fight for 900 days, rather than six days, as in the Six-Day War, if in the end the casualties will be the same.

In terms of the country's interests, short wars are generally better. Israeli leaders knew this in the early decades of the state. They preferred rapid advance. They also knew that a long war would be a race against time.

The international community and other factors mean that one can’t fight a war forever. Israeli officials have boasted that the IDF will remain in southern Lebanon and that 200,000 Lebanese forced to evacuate will not return. However, there is pressure on Israel to begin some type of withdrawal.

What to make of the current situation?

Israel’s prime minister told the JNS International Policy Summit on June 22 that “we decimated Hezbollah's military machine. We prevented the Radwan force from invading the Galilee. We destroyed over 90% of the 150,000 rockets and missiles Hezbollah amassed against us.”

He claimed Israel has established security zones in Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon. This is the new doctrine: carving out buffer zones, razing the homes in those zones, and then staying. This puts a long-term burden on the IDF to stay in static positions in these zones and patrol them.

While the war in Lebanon is presented as a success, it raises questions. Hezbollah is a terrorist group. It should never have become so strong as to possess 150,000 rockets and have a conventional force capable of invading Israel. In fact, in all of Israel’s history, there was never a force in Lebanon capable of invading Israel.

Not since 1948 has Israel been invaded. Israel’s great leaders of the past prided themselves on preventing Israel from being invaded, and they took the fight to the enemy in rapid wars such as 1956, 1967, and even 1973 and 1982.

Although 1973 was initially a setback, the IDF quickly took the fight to the enemy, crossing the Suez Canal in two weeks of fighting. Not 900 days, but two weeks. That was the doctrine of fighters such as Moshe Dayan, Ariel Sharon, Yizhak Rabin and others.

Even in 1982, although the war became a quagmire, the initial advance covered more ground in two days than the entire 988-day war in Lebanon at that time. In fact, the negative aspects of the war all began when Israel decided to stay for 18 years, which is the policy Israel has adopted again. Will the result be the same?

In 1978, the Litani offensive also covered more ground in Lebanon in a few days than the entire war at that time. One argument for why this takes so long is that Hezbollah is so strong. However, this goes back to the fact that Hezbollah was allowed to get so strong.

Why was it allowed to build a mountain base six miles from the border? And why is that Hezbollah bunker and tunnel system still there, with the IDF apparently being told it needs to cease fire?

The slow war in Lebanon, based on a doctrine from Gaza, has resulted in leaving Hezbollah in the field just miles from the border. This raises questions about why the IDF adopted a slow war concept from Gaza and tried to apply it to Lebanon.

One reason for the slow pace of the war is the creation of new buffer zones along the border. Israel now wants buffer zones. This means patrolling them. Of interest, this means a return to the Bar-Lev line concepts of an earlier era.

However, those static forts were seen as problematic in 1973.

The question is, why is Israel returning to concepts from the 1990s and before that appear to have failed? Israel’s technological superiority generally means it can choose the time and place to carry out precision attacks. With all this superiority, it’s unclear why the policy has led back to WWI-style methods.

Israeli technology is better suited to fast wars where the enemy is never allowed to regroup and the enemy is always kept off balance.

Now, Hezbollah apparently can regroup under the ceasefire. The fact that it is still so close to the border will mean that, as with Hamas, the terrorist group may remain, leading to more wars in the future.

Seth J. Frantzman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-900125

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Sampling flaws may have inflated Lancet's Gaza mortality survey death toll, researchers argue - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

Released by Professor Emeritus Sergio DellaPergola of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and independent researcher Mark Zlochin, the correspondence analyzed the survey’s publicly released data.

 

Buildings lie in ruins amid the rubble in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, December 8, 2025.

(photo credit: NIR ELIAS/REUTERS)

The widely cited Gaza Mortality Survey, published in The Lancet Global Health, may be more unreliable than previously assumed, according to new correspondence recently published in the British medical journal.

Released by Professor Emeritus Sergio DellaPergola of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and independent researcher Mark Zlochin, the correspondence analyzed the survey’s publicly released data and found several discrepancies in its methodology and study sample.

According to the Gaza Mortality Survey, some 75,200 violent deaths have occurred in Gaza during the Israel-Hamas War, which started on October 7, 2023.

However, DellaPergola and Zlochin argue that the population sample used by researchers in the survey was inaccurate.

They note that the results from two of the interviewer teams, Gaza9 and Gaza3, are extreme outliers that “diverge materially from those of the remaining teams.”

Palestinians carry aid supplies they collected from trucks that entered Gaza through Israel, in Beit Lahia, in the northern Gaza Strip August 10, 2025. (credit: Dawoud Abu Alkas/Reuters)

One-quarter of violent deaths claimed by only eight percent of sample

Gaza9, for example, reported on 100 out of 393 (roughly one-quarter) violent deaths, while surveying only eight percent of the total sample. Both Gaza9 and Gaza3 also exhibited different demographic structures from the remaining teams, including having lower populations of children and smaller mean household sizes.

"Population-level mortality estimates are only as reliable as the representativeness of the underlying sample," DellaPergola said. "Our analysis raises important questions regarding whether the survey achieved the level of representativeness necessary to support its national mortality estimates."

Other anomalies in the recorded data included survey teams covering only small portions of the areas allocated to them, discrepancies in the estimates of Gazan prisoners, and quality-control procedures not catching any of the aforementioned issues.

Medical journal's history of anti-Israel publications

This is not the first time that The Lancet has come under fire for its publication of articles relating to Israel.

Earlier this month, The Lancet published a petition calling for the suspension of the Israel Medical Association (IMA) from the World Medical Association (WMA).

The petition was created by health organizations such as the People’s Health Movement (PHM), Artsen voor Gaza (Doctors for Gaza), and the Health Advisory Council of the Jewish Voice for Peace calling for the IMA to be suspended from the WMA over “its failure to speak out against the genocide of Palestinians, the destruction of health-care infrastructure, and the torture and killing of health-care workers in Gaza.”

In July 2024, the medical journal also published a piece authored by doctors Rasha Khatib, Martin McKee, and Salim Yusuf, which claimed that “it is not implausible to estimate that up to 186,000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza.”

Despite the fact that it was designated as a “correspondence” or a letter to the editor rather than a peer-reviewed academic article, the article was disseminated en masse and shared by figures such as UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese.

Mathilda Heller contributed to this report. 

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-900156

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Minister Gamliel: Voluntary emigration from Gaza is still feasible - Shimon Cohen

 

by Shimon Cohen

After assessing feasibility, establishing a directorate, and examining international law, the minister is convinced that voluntary emigration from Gaza is still possible.

 

Gazans, illustration                                                                                          Flash 90

Science and Technology Minister Galit Gamliel, who also serves as a cabinet member on the Defense and Security Affairs Committee, was among the first Israeli officials to outline a formal political objective regarding the voluntary emigration of Gaza residents from the Strip.

“The plan has not disappeared. It is moving forward at its own pace," Gamliel said in an interview with Arutz Sheva - Israel National News, describing the preparations she has made to develop what she called a comprehensive strategic framework for the humanitarian evacuation of Gaza’s population.

According to Gamliel, her work included examining similar situations in conflict zones around the world, reviewing international law, and analyzing possible models for implementation. She said the effort stems from the assessment that, in order to prevent Gaza from once again becoming a threat to Israeli civilians, and given what she described as the lack of realistic political and security alternatives, a solution involving residents leaving the Strip must be considered.

Gamliel pointed to several obstacles that would need to be addressed before such a plan could be implemented. One of the main challenges, she said, is the lack of an official authority in Gaza with which Israel could coordinate, noting that there is no intention to work with either Hamas or the Palestinian Authority.

She also referred to the complexities involved in working with international bodies, including the US-established Board Of Peace, as well as the hostility on the ground, which she said demonstrates the difficulty of achieving cooperation with Gaza’s population.

The minister argued that the widespread destruction of infrastructure in Gaza means reconstruction would require at least a decade, assuming there is a decision to rebuild, and would involve enormous financial costs. “Therefore, this is the most appropriate solution for both us and them," she said.

Gamliel also cited a survey in which 5,000 Gaza residents were reportedly asked about the possibility of emigration, claiming that 4,000 expressed interest in such an option.

Another challenge, she said, is the question of how Gaza residents would be absorbed in other countries. While some options that were previously discussed have been removed from consideration, she said others still present “significant potential" for advancing the plan.

According to Gamliel, the possibility of implementing the initiative increases as Israel expands its control on the ground, which she said is approaching 70 percent of Gaza’s territory. She added that Hamas’s continued presence creates obstacles for such a process but suggested that this could change in the future.

Gamliel said that a dedicated office for voluntary emigration has already been established, with officials working on advancing the initiative. She added that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s adviser Caroline Glick was appointed as his representative to the office and “will lead this campaign on behalf of the Prime Minister."

“There is a major national effort to enable anyone who wants to leave to do so," Gamliel said. She added that positions previously presented by US President Donald Trump at the UN Security Council included the principle that anyone wishing to leave should be allowed to do so. 

Shimon Cohen

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/428992

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

U.S. intel located video proving coronavirus research in China, even as Fauci continued to deny - Steven Richards

 

by Steven Richards

Newly declassified documents show the Intelligence Community had circulated a video of a U.S. government grantee describing experiments in China to manipulate coronaviruses to predict human transmission.

 

The year after the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States, a U.S. intelligence official flagged a video circulating online showing a government-funded scientist admitting publicly that his colleagues in China had manipulated spike proteins on coronaviruses. 

During this time, leading health official Dr. Anthony Fauci continued to double down on his claim his office had not funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab in China where scientists conducted such experiments. 

Fauci’s apparatus had also ruthlessly cracked down on questions into the origins of COVID-19, seeking to discredit theories that the virus may have escaped containment in a laboratory accident. 

“Hey guys, Just saw this video online,” an intelligence community official wrote in an email to colleagues. The email was released in a new batch of COVID-19 documents declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard in the last hours of her tenure.

“It’s from a 2016 NY Academy of Medicine meeting where Daszak talks about his colleagues in China manipulating the spike protein on coronavirus to make them more virulent,” the individual added. 

In the video, which was posted to the online streaming platform Rumble, Dr. Peter Daszak explained how his “colleagues in China” grafted spike proteins from discovered coronaviruses onto “pseudoparticles” in order to test whether they could infect human cells. 

“We found other coronaviruses in bats … some of them looked very similar to SARS. So, we sequenced the spike protein, the protein that attaches to cells, then we–well I didn’t do this work, my colleagues in China did the work–you create pseudoparticles, you insert the spike proteins from those viruses, see if they bind to human cells,” Daszak said. “And each step of this you move closer and closer to this virus could really become pathogenic in people.” 

Daszak and his research organization, EcoHealth Alliance, were at the center of scrutiny over origins of the COVID-19 pandemic because of the risky science they supported in China known as gain-of-function research. EcoHealth, a global nonprofit supported by U.S. government grants, helped fund research in Wuhan, China, where the virus is said to have originated. 

Shortly after President Donald Trump took office last January, the Department of Health and Human Services banned both Daszak and EcoHealth from receiving federal funding for five years for allegedly facilitating and passing taxpayer money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China before the beginning of the pandemic. 

The existence of the video and Daszak’s comments at the conference provide further evidence that raising the possibility that Fauci likely possessed an understanding that the United States government had, at least indirectly, funded the very gain-of-function research that he continued to insist it had not. 

Just a month before the internal Intelligence Community email, Fauci had repeated his testimony to the Senate, denying his office had funded such research. He told Sen. Rand Paul, "The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology."

Later that year, however, the National Institutes of Health changed the story and admitted to Congress that it had funded a Wuhan Institute of Virology experiment that altered a bat coronavirus through gain-of-function. 

The newly declassified documents also show that the Biden administration buried a whistleblower complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General that alleged Dr. Fauci had lied to Congress when he testified about the conduct of gain of function research at the National Institutes of Health, Just the News previously reported.

“The complaint alleges Dr. Fauci provided false testimony to Congress related to the conduct of gain of function research at the National Institutes of Health, thereby ‘misleading the American people and Congressional oversight,’” Acting Intelligence Community Inspector General Tamara Johnson wrote Aug. 11, 2021, to then-DNI Avril Haines. 

Rather than refer the alleged lie to the independent watchdog at the Department of Health and Human Services, which was responsible for probing misconduct in Fauci's office, Haines referred the concerns instead to Health Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Biden political appointee who is now running to be California governor.

Johnson also made clear she didn't want to send the complaint to her peer at HHS, the inspector general.

"The general dispute about 'gain-of-function' research is already in the public domain making it highly probable that the HHS-OIG would already be aware of the allegation that the Dr. Fauci’s testimony was inaccurate (albeit from a different source, not our ICWPA submitter). Consequently, we determined there would be no merit in referring the matter to HHS OIG," she wrote.

Gabbard said the documents she released late Thursday in her final hours as DNI demonstrate that government officials, including Fauci, engaged in a cover-up to mislead the public about how the COVID-19 pandemic started.

“The tactics used to hide the truth are straight from the deep state playbook: politicized self-serving leaders like Dr. Fauci covered up their own wrongdoing and abuses of power, manipulated intelligence, lied to Congress, and undermined a duly elected President by restricting his access to vital facts needed to keep the country safe," Gabbard said, "It’s time the American people learn the real story.”

Fauci, who retired before President Donald Trump returned to the White House, has repeatedly denied engaging in wrongdoing or lying to Congress. But he did accept a pardon from President Joe Biden in late 2024. 

Beyond the intelligence community whistleblower's allegations, Gabbard said she too believed Fauci lied to Congress on another matter in 2024 when he claimed he had not talked to intelligence agencies about virus research. 

Steven Richards

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/intelligence-community-shared-video-proving-virus-research-china

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer resigns - Josephine Walker, Rebecca Falconer

 

by Josephine Walker, Rebecca Falconer

The Labour Party, which Starmer currently leads, must quickly choose a new leader as the U.K. faces an economic crisis tied to the war in Iran.

 

Former U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the Élysée Palace in Paris on April 17. Photo: Bastien Ohier/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images

 

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer resigned Monday after weeks of turmoil within his government, setting the country up to find its seventh leader in the last decade.

Why it matters: The Labour Party, which Starmer currently leads, must quickly choose a new leader as the U.K. faces an economic crisis tied to the war in Iran.

• Starmer said he will continue as a caretaker until his successor is chosen, which he promised would happen by the opening of Parliament in September.

Driving the news: Starmer faced calls from members of his party to resign after disastrous May local elections that saw Labour lose control of Wales' Parliament, record its worst Scottish election results on record and drop over 1,200 seats in England.

• Following the heavy election losses, former Tony Blair-era government minister Andy Burnham announced plans to return to Parliament and was last week elected to a seat in northern England after declaring "a vote for me will be a vote to change Labour."

What they're saying: "The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to that question, and I accept that answer with good grace," Starmer said outside 10 Downing Street.

State of play: Anger had been growing for months over several Starmer policies and controversies.

• Starmer's government did a U-turn on several proposals, including welfare cuts.
• The firing of Peter Mandelson from his post as U.K. ambassador to the U.S. over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein also generated backlash, and was promptly followed by news that Starmer had moved forward with Mandelson's appointment despite his failing security checks.

Zoom in: Starmer distanced himself from the revelations at the time and said he was "absolutely furious" that members of his government had advanced Mandelson's appointment in spite of the risk, calling it "unforgivable" and saying he had been unaware.

• Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch called Starmer's claims "completely preposterous."
• Hundreds of pages related to Mandelson's appointment that were published on June 1 piled further pressure on Starmer. In one exchange, Mandelson told a minister that Starmer "lacks verve, as does the Cabinet as a whole."

Flashback: Starmer reportedly chose Mandelson despite his ties to Epstein because he believed Mandelson's trade expertise would help navigate President Trump's planned tariff policies.

• After details of Mandelson's relationship with Epstein emerged, Mandelson was fired in September 2025 and he was later arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office, including potentially leaking trade secrets to Epstein.
• He has denied wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime.

By the numbers: Starmer's tenure as prime minister was among the shortest in modern British history.

• Liz Truss lasted just 44 days in 2022.
• Rishi Sunak, elected in 2022, served for one year and eight months.
• Starmer, elected on July 5, 2024, served for just under two years.

What's next: Labour officials are expected to begin a leadership contest immediately, with Burnham viewed as the leading contender to replace Starmer.

• His odds of being the next PM topped 95% on multiple prediction markets Monday morning.

Go deeper: Europe confronts Epstein shame amid muted U.S. reckoning

Editor's note: This story has been updated with details about Burnham.

Josephine Walker, Rebecca Falconer

Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/06/22/keir-starmer-resigns-prime-minister-labour-andy-burnham

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Mamdani sparks fury after labeling AIPAC 'monsters' - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani criticized after branding AIPAC and its supporters "monsters". Manhattan rabbi: “This is pure incitement."

 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is coming under fire after yet another antisemitic statement, this time taking aim at the pro-Israel group AIPAC and labelling it and its supporters as “monsters".

The controversial comments were made during a June 18 rally Mamdani held with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and progressive candidates ahead of Tuesday’s primary elections.

Mamdani said in his remarks that for AIPAC, “the only thing more frightening than democracy being allowed to run its course is an end to genocide and Netanyahu's wars."

He further claimed that AIPAC moves “millions in dark money to accomplish a single goal, to preserve their power so that they can turn us against one another instead of our leaders turning towards the moral change we all know to be necessary."

“In the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we need not live in fear of monsters any longer," Mamdani said later.

His comments were condemned by Rabbi Chaim Steinmetz, senior rabbi of the Kehilath Jeshurun synagogue in Manhattan, who wrote in a post on social media that “Mamdani is accusing AIPAC of being a monster that subverts democracy, supports genocide and wants to divide Americans."

“This is pure incitement. It inspires people like Elias Rodriguez to take violent action against AIPAC and its supporters," added Rabbi Steinmetz, referencing the terrorist who murdered two Israeli Embassy staff members in Washington, DC, last May.

“Well, I'm an AIPAC supporter. And Mamdani is inciting hatred against people like me," the rabbi wrote, adding, “Mayor Mamdani: you are speaking about me. About millions of New Yorkers who support the very policies AIPAC advocates for. You are demonizing them. And you are the one who is turning New Yorkers against each other in order to grab power."

“New York already has an antisemitism problem. Right now, you are pouring fuel on the fire. I shudder to think what happens next. But you will be responsible for it," Rabbi Steinmetz warned.

The head of the Simon Wiesenthal Center also blasted Mamdani’s remarks.

“The claim that AIPAC exists not to pursue a political agenda, but to spread discord and wield influence for its own sake, is not new," said Simon Wiesenthal Center CEO Jim Berk.

“Soviet anti-Zionist campaigns and earlier antisemitic movements similarly portrayed Jewish organizations as pursuing power not to achieve political goals, but because Jews themselves were said to crave influence and control," Berk continued.

“The suggestion that Jewish political participation is inherently suspect, illegitimate, or secretly manipulative is abhorrent. This is the same old story, retold in a new language."

Mamdani has become notorious for his antisemitic and anti-Israel statements and actions. During his election campaign, Mamdani refused to disavow the phrase “globalize the intifada". He was also called out for criticizing Israel on October 8, 2023 - just one day after the Hamas massacre in southern Israel.

He has repeatedly accused Israel of war crimes in its battle against Hamas in Gaza, and has vowed to arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York City.

Mamdani then caused an uproar on his first day in office when he cancelled executive orders related to Israel, which were issued by his predecessor, Eric Adams.

The move cancelled an order signed by Adams in June of 2025 formally recognizing the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.

Another executive order which was cancelled prohibited mayoral appointees and agency staff from boycotting and disinvesting from Israel.

Mamdani has faced multiple antisemitism controversies since taking office. Most recently, Mamdani boycotted the annual Israel Day Parade in New York City, becoming the first mayor to boycott the event. 

Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/428981

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

US allies ponder closer China relations as insurance against more Trump administration uncertainty - Eric J. Lyman

 

by Eric J. Lyman

Mark Carney has reshaped his country’s approach to China, becoming the first sitting Canadian prime minister to visit Beijing in nearly a decade.

 

French leaders at the recently completed Group of Seven (G7) summit agreed – at least on paper – to new, coordinated steps to reduce dependence on China. 

But discussions in Évian also exposed a more complicated problem: The same allies Washington wants to enlist to counterbalance Beijing’s influence are increasingly looking for ways to protect themselves from Washington.

That tension is becoming one of the central topics of the Western Alliance, with Canada and the major European powers wary of China’s increasing economic power. But after months of tariffs, trade threats, and doubts about Washington’s reliability as an ally, those countries are also trying to reduce reliance on the U.S.

No Western power is embracing Beijing. Countries remain widely worried about China’s overcapacity, state subsidies, industrial dumping and its hold on rare earth minerals. The European Union’s trade deficit with China totals more than $1 billion per day, an unsustainable level. 

But countries do appear to be looking at China as a hedge, something Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney described as increasing “strategic autonomy,” saying last month that “we live in a world where integration has been weaponized.” 

Since becoming Canada’s leader last year, Carney has reshaped his country’s approach to China. In January, he became the first sitting Canadian prime minister to visit Beijing in nearly a decade, saying it was part of a grand strategy to diversify trade partnerships with China, something he said “presents enormous opportunities” for Canada.

“Our relationship with the United States … is much more multifaceted, much deeper, and much broader than it is with China,” Carney said at the time. “But, yes, in terms of the way our relationship has progressed in recent months with China, it is more predictable, and you see you see results coming from that.”

Europe’s most vocal version of Carney’s argument has come from French President Emmanuel Macron, who has argued that the continent must avoid becoming subordinate to either Washington or Beijing. 

On a trip to Greece in April, Macron warned that “any strategy of decoupling from China” risked increasing European dependence on the U.S. at a time when European countries should be wary of that. 

“We should not underestimate that this is a unique moment where a U.S. president, a Russian president, and a Chinese president are dead against the Europeans,” Macron said. “So, this is the right moment for us to wake up.”

But though Macron said he believed tensions between the U.S. and Europe would “outlast the Trump administration,” the French leader has not abandoned hopes of improving the ties with Washington. 

At the conclusion of the G7 event, Macron invited President Donald Trump to a state dinner at Versailles, near Paris, to celebrate the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence and noting France’s central role in helping the U.S. defeat their British colonial masters. Though the meeting did not yield concrete results, analysts said it was still symbolically important.

“In any leader’s relationship, whether we’re talking about [Chinese President] Xi [Jinping], [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, or Macron, you want to be on this American president’s good side,” Jeffrey Hawkins, a former U.S. diplomat told reporters. “And a way to do that is to hist him, to welcome him, in a way where he feels well received, where he feels important and respected.” 

The G7 is made up of the world’s seven largest full industrialized economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S. 

Eric J. Lyman

Source: https://justthenews.com/world/some-us-allies-seek-possible-china-hedge-amid-washington-uncertainty

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Latin America continues to shift right as Trump-backed candidate declares victory in Colombia - John Solomon

 

by John Solomon

Election officials had not formally declared a winner Sunday night but de la Espriella declared victory and spoke with Trump.

 

Abelardo de la Espriella, a conservative political newcomer backed by President Donald Trump, declared victory Sunday in Colombia’s cliffhanger presidential election as Latin America continued to shift to the right during the American president's second term.

De La Espriella captured 49.7% of the vote, with liberal Iván Cepeda taking 48.7% in a runoff seen as a verdict on outgoing President Gustavo Petro and a stagnant economy ridden by crime.

Election officials had not formally declared a winner Sunday night, but de la Espriella declared victory and said he had already spoken with Trump. 

"We must all respect these electoral results," he said. “And many countries are already weighing in.

"The Colombian people, the masses, spoke out and we defeated the regime," he added.

Trump and his administration congratulated de la Expriella. "He won, BIG!" Trump wrote on social media.

The State Department said Secretary Marco Rubio called the Colombian president-elect to congratulate him.

"This result reflects the will of the Colombian people and their commitment to democracy," the department said.  "The Trump Administration looks forward to working closely with his incoming administration to advance our bilateral and regional security cooperation, end illegal immigration to the United States, and strengthen the economic ties between our two countries."

A businessman and lawyer, de La Espriella was making his first run for office and captured Trump’s support with a plan for economic reform and a crime crackdown.

He is a dual U.S. and Colombian citizen and a registered Republican who worked in Miami. 

John Solomon 

Source: https://justthenews.com/world/latin-america/trump-backed-candidate-colombia-holds-narrow-lead-presidential-cliffhanger

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Majority of women abducted in Syria sectarian violence remain missing, report finds - Danielle Greyman-Kennard

 

by Danielle Greyman-Kennard

In 2025, the Syrian Feminist Lobby documented 82 abduction cases across the Syrian coast, western Hama countryside, and Homs. Some 10% were girls, while 90% were women aged 15 to 40.

 

A syrian refugee takes part in a demonstration in Athens calling for women rights on March 8, 2017.

(photo credit: LOUISA GOULIAMAKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Content warning: The following content contains graphic descriptions of sexual assault and abuse that some readers may find disturbing.

Around 60% of women abducted during sectarian attacks last year in the western Hama countryside and Homs have not been returned, according to a report published last month by the Syrian Feminist Lobby.

The report, Abduction of Syrian Women: A War on Dignity, argues that violence against women from minority communities, particularly Druze and Alawite women, has been enabled by the collapse of state institutions, weakening the rule of law, and a growing culture of impunity.

In 2025, the Syrian Feminist Lobby documented 82 abduction cases across the Syrian coast, western Hama countryside, and Homs. Some 10% were girls, while 90% were women aged 15 to 40.

At publication, only 40% of abducted women had been released. The organization said many of those freed were subjected to extortion and violence during captivity.

Syrian women living in Jordan use the old Syrian flag adopted by the Syrian opposition groups to cover their mouths during a demonstration against Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and his regime as they gather in front of the prime minister's offices in Amman on June 13, 2012. (credit: KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP/GettyImages)

Citing a March report by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the lobby said authorities failed to respond effectively to complaints. Police reports were filed but not followed up on, and in some cases, officials discouraged families from pursuing legal action.

Ransom demands were made in a minority of cases but were rarely accompanied by proof of life or location details. In one case, a family paid a ransom, but the woman was not returned.

Families also reported receiving messages telling them to “forget” their missing daughters. Others said they received calls from local and international numbers warning that continued searching would result in the women being returned dead.

In more than one case, husbands were sent divorce papers believed to have been issued under coercion. At least one underage girl was forced into marriage.

Based only on verified cases, 190 women and girls disappeared after the July attacks on the Druze community in Sweida. Some were later located after communications were restored, while others remain missing.

The lobby said many abducted women were released through mediation or exchange deals. In some cases, deaths were confirmed during release processes, though circumstances remain unclear.

The report states that women were used as leverage against local communities for political purposes. “This targeting was preceded by waves of sectarian incitement and hate speech in the media and on social networks. The pattern reflects the intersection of gendered violence with sectarian targeting, in which women's bodies are used to send collective messages beyond the individual victim to her community,” the lobby assessed.

During extrajudicial killings in Sweida, where men were subjected to religiously charged insults before being brutally murdered, the report also documents cases in which women were stripped before being killed, and in some instances their bodies were mutilated or burned. Photographs of bodies were later circulated online. The report also cites the rape of a young girl in front of her mother and the abduction of children as young as 11 months. It says the youngest hostage still in captivity is 15.

The impact of the violence continues to be felt by survivors, who now face severe psychological, social, and economic consequences, the report added. It warns that limited access to witness protection and justice deepens vulnerability. Many women in Homs described confining themselves to the home, fearing being taken in public, while others described withdrawing from education out of fear of further violence.

Drugged, held in the dark, fear used as a weapon

Women who escaped or were released described being drugged, held in dark rooms, and moved between locations. One survivor said masked armed men forced abducted women to wear black niqabs covering their entire bodies before leaving them at the abduction site and threatening them not to speak.

“This threat shows how violence extends beyond detention. Fear is used to enforce silence and maintain control over survivors and their families,” the lobby noted.

Some women reported witnessing money exchanged for transfers, which the lobby says indicates links to human trafficking. Others described hearing multiple dialects and foreign-accented Arabic.

One survivor said she was subjected to sexual violence and held in solitary confinement for a week. She said captors forced her to record a video claiming she had left voluntarily with a lover. A man referred to as “the sheikh” supervised the recording and pressured her into accepting divorce and marriage to her abductor in exchange for release.

“This pattern reflects the use of coercion to produce forced narratives that deny the violation and turn the survivor into an instrument for concealing the crime rather than documenting it,” the report states.

The case, which resembles one referenced in the UN report, also alleges police treated the survivor as a criminal and issued a religious ruling against her before release. The lobby claims her access to legal support was obstructed, and her abductor obtained security information about her, “indicating a link to official agencies.”

In Syria, adultery is a criminal offense, with penalties ranging from three months to two years, depending on jurisdiction. Islamist authorities have also previously executed women accused of extramarital relations.

The report describes strong religious framing in many cases. Abductors reportedly called themselves a “lifeline” while threatening the killing of “infidel Nusayris” (a derogatory term for Alawites). Victims were allegedly forced to convert, marry captors, and adopt religious practices, including the niqab and rituals.

Multiple survivors described being transported through checkpoints where security personnel appeared to interact with abductors familiarly.

Several women also reported seeing abductors in military-style clothing resembling General Security uniforms or armed groups with red headbands, which the report suggests indicates possible involvement of auxiliary forces or affiliated actors.

Lack of concern from officials

The report also cites concerning official responses, including families being told their daughters were “immoral,” had “left voluntarily,” or could not be controlled. The lobby said such statements undermine trust in justice institutions and limit access to remedies.

In one case, a survivor was held for more than five hours without medical or psychological care by General Security, while her father was detained for several hours before seeing her.

Other survivors were forced to give statements inside security facilities in the presence of individuals allegedly linked to their abductors, and threatened with solitary confinement if they refused. Some testimonies were later broadcast publicly.

“I lost trust in people. For many years, I was very enthusiastic. When we went down to demonstrations or gatherings, we felt a sense of belonging to Syrians and to Syria. Today I do not have that feeling. I also feel a loss of trust in the future. What future is waiting for us?” a survivor of the Sweida massacre told the lobby. “I have no trust in politics, and no trust in the world either. They all failed us. Politics looks for interests without thinking about people and what happens to them. The world is also not fair, and all the talk about human rights or global solidarity has no value."

The report says survivors were coached to repeat phrases thanking security agencies and denying abduction, while being prevented from naming perpetrators or describing detention sites. It argues this violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and obstructs investigations.

It also documents incitement in official or semi-official media against investigators and women human rights defenders.

The lobby said authorities largely dismissed the reports. Syria’s Interior Ministry reportedly said 41 of 43 reported abductions of Alawite women were not genuine cases, further weakening trust in judicial institutions.  

Danielle Greyman-Kennard

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-900135

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter