Bennett, Eisenkot draw the battle lines in race to lead Israel’s next coalition - analysis - Anna Barsky

 

​ by Anna Barsky

Bennett is offering soft-right voters an alternative to Netanyahu, while Eisenkot is seeking to hold the political center while persuading right-wing voters that he is not dependent on the Left.

 

Naftali Bennett and Gadi Eisenkot at a march for conscripting haredi (ultra-Orthodox) Jews into the IDF, in Jerusalem, January 15, 2026; illustrative.

(photo credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)

 

B’Yachad leader Naftali Bennett and Yashar leader Gadi Eisenkot are no longer waiting for candidate lists to be finalized and have begun competing directly as both seek to define their political camps and coalition paths ahead of the coming election.

Speaking at an event in Rishon Lezion, Bennett drew a clear right-wing line against Eisenkot, saying he supports E1 construction between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim and that “anyone who opposes a Palestinian state should support settlement in E1.”

He also made clear that he opposes a Palestinian state “under any constellation.”

Regarding haredi (ultra-Orthodox) conscription, Bennett positioned himself against both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Eisenkot.

“Bibi is talking about a 50% exemption, Gadi is talking about a 30% exemption, I am talking about 0 exemption,” he said, stressing that any framework that leaves 30% outside the draft would ultimately collapse into a much broader exemption.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a Knesset vote, July 16, 2026. (credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)

Bennett also hardened his security stance, stating, “Anyone who launches terror balloons into Israel deserves death,” while noting that, as prime minister, he ordered the purchase of munitions intended to help Israel contend with Iran’s air defense system as part of preparations for a strike.

He also proposed targeting the Iranian regime with a sustained military, economic, diplomatic, and cyber campaign.

Eisenkot aims to lead governing coalition

Eisenkot, for his part, has sought to present himself as a candidate who can translate his polling advantage into a governing coalition.

In Maariv’s weekend poll, his Yashar party received 25 seats, compared with 15 for Bennett’s B’Yachad and 20 for Likud. Eisenkot also led Netanyahu in the question of suitability for prime minister, 48% to 37%, while Bennett led Netanyahu 45% to 40%.

Eisenkot has spoken of a target of 63-65 seats for his camp and attacked Netanyahu’s approach, which he described as “victory through not losing.”

He has also hardened his position on conscription, setting a goal of at least 10,000 haredi recruits in each cycle, most of them to the IDF and some to national service, alongside personal sanctions against those who do not serve.

Eisenkot pledged that if his camp failed to reach a 61-seat majority, he would work to expand his coalition rather than default to another election.

In doing so, he is leaving himself the option of trying to assemble a majority even after the election if the results do not give his camp 61 seats.

Eisenkot also claimed that when he was IDF chief of staff, Netanyahu asked him to appoint Ofer Winter as military secretary. The request was made in part because of the importance of having someone who wore a kippah at his side.

Eisenkot said he refused because he was unwilling to make a military appointment based on political or sectoral considerations.

THE DIFFERENCES between Bennett and Eisenkot have become sharper as the two continue to campaign for overlapping groups of voters.

Bennett is offering soft-right voters an alternative to Netanyahu without moving closer to the Left. Eisenkot is seeking to hold the political Center while persuading right-wing voters that he is not dependent on Yair Golan.

E1, the conscription law, and the approach to the Palestinians have highlighted the clear dividing lines between Bennett and Eisenkot, with the conscription issue emerging as one of the primary tests facing the next government.

Shas has already raised the stakes, as MK Yoav Ben-Tzur said the party would demand that a conscription law be passed before the next government is formed.

“If we have to enter a coalition, a conscription law will pass before the government is formed. Unequivocally,” he said.

Netanyahu, therefore, faces conflicting demands even before coalition negotiations have begun.

Bennett and Eisenkot are competing over who can present the stricter conscription framework; Shas is demanding that the issue be settled as a condition for joining the government; and Likud is already signaling that it is prepared to discuss that demand even before the government is sworn in.

Liberman keeps his distance

Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman has once again maintained his independence and has not declared support for any prime minister candidate.

In Maariv’s weekend poll, Yisrael Beytenu received nine seats. Regarding the question of suitability for prime minister, Netanyahu led Liberman 40% to 37%.

Separately, Yair Golan is operating from the other end of the political spectrum.

The Democrats have invested in a campaign aimed at young voters and in consolidating an independent left-wing camp, while Golan, for now, is also maintaining his political independence ahead of what comes next.

The Zionist opposition’s advantage still does not automatically produce a majority for an alternative government.

The Arab parties received a combined 13 seats, eight for the Joint List of Hadash, Ta’al, and Balad, and five for Ra’am.

The Zionist opposition’s advantage still does not automatically produce a majority for an alternative government.

Eisenkot could emerge as the leader of the largest party and still discover that the numbers do not add up to a coalition.

Bennett wants to remain an independent alternative. Liberman does not want to become an appendage to another candidate. Golan wants to preserve his party’s independence.

Benny Gantz and Gilad Erdan, meanwhile, are preoccupied, first and foremost, with their own political survival.

The battle for the premiership has already begun, even though the composition of a potential alternative government to Netanyahu remains far from settled.

This is how the political system looks on the eve of the new week: on the Right, parties are trying to prevent votes from being lost; in the Center, parties are trying to assemble lists that will be able to clear the electoral threshold; and among the larger parties, the battle over leadership of the respective camps is already underway.

The approaching deadline for submitting candidate lists will force the parties to finalize their alliances, but the question of coalition formation will remain open even afterward.

Even before Election Day, several questions that will directly affect the result will be decided: which lists will clear the electoral threshold, how many votes will be lost below it, and which party leaders will reach the ballot box with a plausible path to a 61-seat majority. 

Anna Barsky

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-election-2026/article-906999?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=August302026

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Arab-Israeli parties unite after Palestinian Authority involvement—report - JNS Staff

 

​ by JNS Staff

The concern in the P.A. was that running separately might have led Hadash, Balad and Ta’al to each fall short of the 3.25% threshold of votes needed to enter the Knesset.

 

Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority, delivers a speech regarding the Middle East peace plan at P.A. headquarters in Ramallah, Jan. 28, 2020. Credit: Flash90.

Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas and other P.A. officials were involved in the process that led to the unification of three Arab-Israeli political parties into a technical bloc ahead of the Oct. 27 national election, in an effort to prevent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from forming the next government, Israel’s Channel 12 reported on Saturday.

The P.A. exerted “heavy pressure” on the parties, the report stated.

The concern in the P.A. was that running separately might lead to the failure of the parties to pass the 3.25% threshold of total votes to enter the Knesset. The three parties in question are the Communist and supposedly secular Hadash Party (with a minority Jewish presence), and the Arab nationalist parties Balad and Ta’al.

The Arab parties announced on Aug. 19 their unification into the Joint List, but without Ra’am, also known as the United Arab List, led by lawmaker Mansour Abbas, which is expected to run on its own.

The four parties have run together in the past as the Joint List, garnering 13 Knesset seats in 2015 following the raising of the threshold the previous year from 2% to 3.25%. It was the third-largest faction in the Knesset at the time, but has since dissolved.

“The decision to establish the Joint List was made for the benefit of the Arab public and at its request, and we say that we will do everything to bring down Netanyahu, regardless of pressure from any other element,” sources in the Joint List said in response to a Channel 12 request for comment.

Most P.A. efforts to finalize a joint bloc focused on Ta’al chairman Ahmad Tibi, according to Channel 12. Contacts were made with Tibi in an attempt to persuade him to agree to the compromise formula proposed for allocating seats on a united bloc candidates list, after previous talks had reached an impasse.

“We must not repeat the mistakes of the previous election and allow Netanyahu to return to power. You are missing a historic opportunity for our people because of internal disputes,” a senior P.A. official was quoted in the report as saying.

Following the unification announcement, Balad chairman Sami Abu Shehadeh told Channel 12 that the three parties would not serve as a “tool” for any candidate for the premiership, neither Netanyahu nor main opposition candidate (according to polls) Gadi Eisenkot, who heads the Yashar Party.

A technical bloc can be disbanded after the election, with each party maintaining its respective number of seats gained separately according to the bloc’s agreed candidates list.

Culture and Sports Minister and Likud Party member Miki Zohar reacted to the report on X on Saturday, writing in Hebrew, “Israel’s enemies are saying explicitly they are working to make us lose the election. What more is left to convince Israel’s citizens to vote only for Netanyahu and the right?” 

JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/news/israel-news/palestinian-authority-urges-arab-israeli-parties-to-unite-to-block-another-netanyahu-govt-report

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Sciolistic and Treadless: The Democrats’ Rough 2026 - Roger Kimball

 

​ by Roger Kimball

Suffering from an acute, and possibly terminal, case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, the Democrats have been assiduous in shredding their credibility since the 2024 election.

 

 

So how is it going? In the Republic, I mean. Pretty well, I’d say. President Trump just announced the Mother of All Oil Deals with Venezuela, the country he liberated from its narco Chinese puppet Nicolás Maduro at the beginning of 2026. (Was it only at the beginning of January 2026 that President Trump extracted Maduro and his wife from their heavily guarded palace? Yes. Time flies when you are having a good time.) “BREAKING NEWS,” the president reported on social media,

The United States of America has just entered into an Agreement with the Country of Venezuela on, THE BIGGEST OIL DEAL IN WORLD HISTORY! At my direction, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, working closely with Highly Respected Interim President of Venezuela, Delcy Rodriguez, and, through a partnership with private business, have secured majority U.S. control of more than 65 BILLION BARRELS of proven Oil Reserves in Venezuela, at no cost to the American Taxpayer. This Historic Transaction MORE THAN DOUBLES American Oil Reserves, greatly increases our Oil Supply, and will substantially lower Gas Prices for all Americans, long into the future, while helping to continue to set Venezuela on a course toward Tremendous Success and Great Prosperity. This Transaction will greatly strengthen the already growing relationship between Venezuela and the United States! Thank you for your attention to this groundbreaking matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

This is good—nay, great, which is to say GREAT—news for America and ordinary Americans (if any Americans can be said to be “ordinary”). It is bad news for Democrats. Why? Hearken to what President Trump said. The deal not only “greatly increases our Oil Supply,” it will also “substantially lower Gas Prices for all Americans, long into the future.” As Jeeves might have observed when he heard that, rem acu tetigisti. Suffering from an acute, and possibly terminal, case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, the Democrats have been assiduous in shredding their credibility since the 2024 election. To an extraordinary extent, they have thrown their lot in with all the many varieties of America haters, from the so-called Democratic Socialists of America to the mouth-frothing, Sharia-law-spouting lunatics who want to turn the United States into another Muslim hellhole.

The Trump administration has been on a tear since noon on January 20, 2025. The border. Energy. Foreign policy. The economy. The toxin of so-called “DEI”—i.e., invidious discrimination masquerading as higher virtue. The weaponization of “gender dysphoria.” The administrative state and its chief export: stifling over-regulation whose only real purpose is to employ regulators and stymie innovation. Anti-semitism on college campuses and sundry municipalities. On all those fronts and more, Trump 2.0 has been like a whirlwind, aiding the good, hindering the bad. It has made the Democrats punch drunk. Their tires are treadless. Wherever they touch reality, they spin out. They can’t get traction. President Trump revitalizes American manufacturing. How can the Democrats be against that? Because—turn the amp up to 11—TRUMP! President Trump tackles rising anti-Semitism at elite universities. What can the Democrats say about that? The best they have come up with is Rep. Jamie Raskin’s pathetic effort to say that the Trump administration is using anti-semitism as a “pretext” to punish or “retaliate” against those noble repositories of “progressive” fatuousness, elite universities.

No, the Democrats open their cupboards and find them nearly bare. Just about the only issue they managed to salvage was “affordability.” The United States has pulverized the Iranian military and is in the process of strangling it economically. A temporary side effect is slightly higher gas prices, which means higher prices for many consumer items. “Please, please, please let the prices stay high,” the Democrats beg as the midterm elections heave into view.

As I write, most polls say that the Democrats are likely to win back the House and possibly the Senate in November. I have never thought that likely. As for the polls, remember what those fake partisan megaphones said about Francesca Hong and Karen Bass. But now that President Trump has put the United States in charge of Venezuela’s huge petroleum reserves, gas prices will plummet and the Democrats will wave their magic wand of “affordability” only to discover that the magic is gone.

I almost feel sorry for the Democrats (emphasis most decidedly on the adverb). Reality just won’t give them a break these days. For the last several years, they have been able to hornswoggle the public with their insanity about boys being girls and girls being boys, climate hysteria, racial hypertrophy, and quite astonishing economic illiteracy. I think that Trump’s present Cabinet is about the best Cabinet since George Washington found himself chewing the fat with Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. In fact, when I ponder the performance of Marco Rubio, Scott Bessent, Pete Hegseth, and Howard Lutnick, among others, I incline to the belief that Trump’s Cabinet might be the best in history.

That is a subject for another day. For now, I will leave you with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s deliciously devastating missive to the skirling squaw from Massachusetts, Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Responding to an August 13 letter from Senator Warren (or her staff), Secretary Bessent took an acetylene torch to the grandstanding anti-Trump huckster. “I am in receipt of your August 13 letter,” Sec. Bessent began,

which unfortunately reveals that you know even less about foreign exchange markets than you do about banking. Terrifyingly, the opening paragraph is wrong about where the money came, what the transaction was, and whether there was even a borrower. What is equally shocking, but not surprising: not a single member of your media mob has a rudimentary-enough level of financial market literacy to spot your remedial error.

Treasury exchanged existing Exchange Stabilization Fund foreign-currency assets for yen. No new congressional appropriation was involved, and no credit was extended to Japan. Japan owes Treasury nothing. There is therefore no risk that Japan will fail to repay a debt that does not exist.

You state that it is “not clear” how preventing disorder in Japan benefits the United States. As your letter notes, Japan is a major holder of U.S. Treasuries. It is also a critical trading partner and a treaty ally. Disorderly yen markets can trigger forced unwinds, which could destabilize global markets and ultimately raise borrowing costs for American families and businesses. For a fuller explanation, I recommend any entry-level course in international finance for you and your staff, or I can give you a tutorial on Foreign Exchange for Dummies.

Ouch.

I would like to propose that every member of the Senate sit for a viva voce examination administered by Scott Bessent on that book, Foreign Exchange for Dummies. Sec. Bessent’s post was the cause of considerable hilarity when it appeared on X. I was happy to see that, in addition to supporting financial literacy, he is doing his bit to strengthen Americans’ vocabulary. In the text accompanying his letter on X, Sec. Bessent continues his scorched earth treatment of the Squaw. “In her latest sciolistic letter to me, @SenWarren made it clear that she knows even less about foreign exchange markets than she does about banking.” The internet was abuzz with appreciative comment about the word “sciolistic.” I am glad to see it. The American Heritage Dictionary defines “sciolism” as “A pretentious attitude of scholarship; superficial knowledgeability.” I first encountered the word in the writings of William F. Buckley Jr. It is, indeed, a Buckley sort of word: Latinate and deflationary, recondite and precise. It is probably too kind for Elizabeth Warren and whoever gins up her complaints, but it is a nice addition to the general rhetorical armory. 

Photo: Markey wins Democrats' endorsement at party convention, easily topping Moulton in Senate primary fight Worcester, MA - May 30: US Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks at the Massachusetts Democratic Party convention on May 30, 2026. (Photo by John Tlumacki/The Boston Globe via Getty Images) 

Roger Kimball is editor and publisher of The New Criterion and the president and publisher of Encounter Books. He is the author and editor of many books, including The Fortunes of Permanence: Culture and Anarchy in an Age of Amnesia (St. Augustine's Press), The Rape of the Masters (Encounter), Lives of the Mind: The Use and Abuse of Intelligence from Hegel to Wodehouse (Ivan R. Dee), and Art's Prospect: The Challenge of Tradition in an Age of Celebrity (Ivan R. Dee). Most recently, he edited and contributed to Where Next? Western Civilization at the Crossroads (Encounter) and contributed to Against the Great Reset: Eighteen Theses Contra the New World Order (Bombardier).

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/08/30/sciolistic-and-treadless-the-democrats-rough-2026/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hasan Piker incites millions against Jews, and the silence is deafening - opinion - Micha Danzig

 

​ by Micha Danzig

An influencer with a massive following sits in front of the camera, victim-blaming Jews, and the world stays silent

 

Influencer and political commentator Hasan Piker is introduced during a campaign rally in Wisconsin in August.

(photo credit: JOSHUA LOTT/GETTY IMAGES)

 

On a recent live stream, with a photo of Jewish Michigan congressional candidate Jeremy Moss on screen behind him, Twitch personality Hasan Piker told his millions of followers that US Jews “have it coming.”

Those who “keep putting this idea out there that they are singularly invested in Israel” should expect that “eventually someone’s going to come around and take action, not against the State of Israel, mind you, but against American Jews,” he said.

Piker called Israel “Jewish ISIS,” saying that Jews were “making antisemitism worse.”

Antisemitism has historically come in two forms. One is transactional: “Renounce whatever it is we are telling you to renounce and safety will supposedly follow.” The other is fixed: “You are the problem regardless of what you renounce, because your identity itself is the offense.”

Mistaking one for the other is how societies miss what’s happening until it is too late. Piker’s rhetoric looks like the first kind. It also smuggles in the second.

Hasan Piker attends a press conference during Web Summit Qatar 2026 at the Doha Exhibition and Convention Center in Doha, Qatar, Feb. 3, 2026. (credit: Noushad Thekkayil/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

The transactional version has a long pedigree. In 1789, as France debated citizenship for Jews who had lived there for centuries, Count Stanislas-Marie-Adélaide de Clermont–Tonnerre delivered the sentence that would define it: “To the Jews as a nation, nothing. To the Jews as individuals, everything.”

In other words, he offered full citizenship in exchange for dissolving the national parts of Jewish identity, an offer Jews “could not refuse.” Every generation since has been handed some version of this, in French, in Russian, and now in the argot of Twitch.

Even the offer’s predecessor, religious-based antisemitism, was never as clean as it pretended. Medieval Europe held out baptism as the door out of persecution. Spain tested that promise and broke it.

After the mass forced conversions of the 14th and 15th centuries, the limpieza de sangre, “the purity of blood,” statutes barred anyone with Jewish ancestry, however distant, from public office, the priesthood, and social standing.

The room marked “convert, and you are free” had a false bottom. Blood, not belief, was the real test.

Sharansky’s litmus test for identifying modern-day antisemitism

Natan Sharansky, the Soviet dissident who spent years in the Gulag for wanting to live as a free Jew in Israel, built a test for recognizing this pattern in real time.

Does the rhetoric demonize Jews or the Jewish state, casting them as uniquely evil? Does it delegitimize Jewish self-determination, treating a Jewish homeland as illegitimate in a way no other nationalism is questioned? Does it apply a double standard, holding Jews or Israel to scrutiny applied to no one else?

Piker’s stream clears all three, and the double standard is easy to prove. US politicians Abdul El-Sayed and Rashida Tlaib have built careers around identification with the Palestinian Arab cause, and have each made claims about Israel that were false or badly distorted.

Imagine a streamer showing their photo and saying Arab Americans “putting this idea out there” should expect that “someone’s going to come around and take action” against them or accuse them of “making Islamophobia worse.” That would be denounced widely and instantly as incitement. No one would call it a warning.
Piker said the Jewish version of that sentence about Moss.

Moss answered for himself. “A California podcaster will not lecture me about what Oakland County’s Jewish community should and shouldn’t believe,” he said, adding that Jews “won’t be gaslit that we’re responsible for the antisemitic harm upon us.”

Rep. Hillary Scholten identified it for what it was. “Calls for violence against American Jews … unacceptable. Full stop,” she said.

El-Sayed, whose Senate campaign Piker spent months building, could only offer that antisemitism is “a scourge” in the abstract, without naming what Piker said or disavowing him.

Multiply that by the rest of the Democratic Party, the country’s largest, and the silence gets harder to explain. A handful spoke up. The overwhelming majority of a party that claims fighting racism and bigotry as a core value said nothing about an allied influencer telling millions that American Jews were inviting violence against themselves.

That gap between the outrage this would generate against any other minority and the silence Piker got from his own coalition is the double standard operating in real time, on screen.

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism identifies both denying Jewish self-determination and holding Jews collectively responsible for Israel’s actions as antisemitic.

Piker did both – and named individuals. “Collectively” is a crucial term here because it marks the point where his rhetoric moves beyond a supposed bargain for safety and becomes more sinister.

When Wilhelm Marr coined “antisemitism” in 1879, he rebranded a hatred that had worn religious clothing for a thousand years into something claiming to be secular and scientific – race, not sin.

He took the false bottom already built into limpieza de sangre and made it official doctrine, a fixed, hereditary trait no conversion could erase. That closure metastasized into Nazi racial law under which converted Jews and decorated Jewish veterans of the First World War still had no path out. The category itself had become the crime.

Piker’s language borrows from both hateful traditions at once. On the surface, he offers a transaction: stop being “invested” in Israel, and the danger recedes. That is Clermont-Tonnerre’s structure.

But “Jewish ISIS” is a distinct kind of accusation. ISIS denotes a terrorist movement; attaching the label to a democracy makes sense only if “Jewish” bears the moral weight of the claim.

The phrase does more than condemn a state. It merges Jewish self-determination with an image of absolute evil. Stripped of its polemical language, the logic echoes Marr’s: An identity treated as inherently corrupt and collectively culpable.

Jew hate is back out in the open, justified and legitimized by all and any excuse

This is also why the “anti-Zionism isn’t antisemitism” argument collapses so often on contact with reality. When anti-Israel rhetoric singles out Jews alone among all peoples on Earth as the one group undeserving of self-determination, and treats Jewish support for that state as evidence of a nefarious group trait, it isn’t a carve-out from antisemitism.

It is antisemitism in fashionable disguise, exactly as it was in Inquisition Spain, Clermont-Tonnerre’s Paris, and Marr’s Germany.

Piker’s own words supply the final tell. He never said he wanted to harm Jews. He said other people will, and that Jews will have brought it on themselves simply by existing and believing what many of them do. He sounded like a bystander describing a forecast.

But Piker is the one seeding the cloud.

Call this what it is. Piker did not warn Jews. He indicted them, collectively, for the crime of existing as they are, then dressed the indictment up as a safety warning. It is the oldest accusation in the book, updated for a platform that rewards it with millions of views instead of pulpits.

Jews have absorbed both forms of this hatred before, sometimes offered by the same movement in the same breath. Most know the difference when they hear it, even when people around them pretend not to. This time, the accusation had a name, a face, and millions of witnesses. Let the record reflect it.

What should concern everyone, Jewish or not, is that this happened to an individual who was called out by name.
The hypocrisy is clear: An equivalent threat made against Arab Americans over the rhetoric of their most visible leaders would be denounced immediately and near universally. Every politician, network, and platform that let this pass also fit

Sharansky’s test, though probably not with the answer they imagined.

Micha Danzig is an attorney and a former IDF soldier and NYPD officer. He writes widely on Israel, Zionism, antisemitism, and Jewish history. He serves on the board of Herut North America.

Source: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-906837

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Syria: Turkey's New Battleground Against Israel - Con Coughlin

 

​ by Con Coughlin

Erdogan has stated that "Jerusalem is ours," and as recently as March 30, 2025, "May the Lord make Zionist Israel destroyed and devastated."

 

• Turkey's continued financial support for Hamas and its provision of safe haven to Hamas terrorists only adds to Israel's view of Turkey as a hostile actor, an attitude that is not helped by Erdogan's constant use of anti-Israel rhetoric in political campaigning and official communications. In June, for example, Turkey's interior minister called for the "liberation of Jerusalem."

• Israel's intelligence establishment, though, presented the US with evidence that Erdogan has other ambitions, which include expanding and solidifying Turkey's military presence at Syrian bases previously used by the Assad regime's Iranian and Russian allies.

• In addition, Erdogan has stated that "Jerusalem is ours," and as recently as March 30, 2025, "May the Lord make Zionist Israel destroyed and devastated."

• Erdogan published a 758-page document that outlines his long-term phased plan to take over "Israel, the Middle East and the Free world."

• Amichai Chikli, Israel's Minister of Diaspora Affairs, said, "Ahmed al-Sharaa's military is Erdoğan's military. Al-Sharaa's ideology is Erdoğan's ideology. Erdoğan and al-Sharaa's ideology is Al Qaeda and ISIS ideology," and cited what he described as their barbaric treatment of non-Muslim minorities in the region.

• [I]t is vital that Erdogan not be allowed to pursue his expansionist aims in Syria and certainly not to have F-35 stealth fighter jets.

Israel has become increasingly concerned about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's attempts to expand his influence in neighbouring Syria, where he played a key role in helping the country's Islamist president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, to overthrow the Assad regime and seize power in December 2024. Pictured: Al-Sharaa shakes hands with Erdogan during a press conference in Ankara, Turkey on February 4, 2025. (Photo by Ozan Kose/AFP via Getty Images)

Amid deepening tensions between Turkey and Israel over Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's attempts to extend his influence over Syria, Israel's decision to strike a Syrian air base on the outskirts of Idlib is designed to send a clear signal to the Turkish leader to rein in his ambitions.

Since the overthrow of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, Syria has increasingly become the focus of the deepening hostility between Israel and Turkey.

In particular, Israel has become increasingly concerned about Erdogan's attempts to expand his influence in neighbouring Syria, where he played a key role in helping the country's new Islamist president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, to overthrow the Assad regime and seize power in December 2024.

Despite repeated Israeli warnings, Erdogan has taken little notice of Israel's concerns, and has continued to expand Turkey's presence into northern Syria, ostensibly to counter the efforts of Kurdish separatists to establish their own autonomous state.

Israel's intelligence establishment, though, presented the US with evidence that Erdogan has other ambitions, which include expanding and solidifying Turkey's military presence at Syrian bases previously used by the Assad regime's Iranian and Russian allies.

It is significant, therefore, that the Israeli airstrikes launched against a Syrian air base in the northern city of Idlib on August 18 took place just hours after a visit by a Turkish delegation to the base. The Turkish officials appear to have been undertaking a reconnaissance mission of the base to assess its suitability for use by the Turkish military.

Syria's state-run Ekhbariya television, citing a military source, reported that Israel had ⁠carried out eight air strikes on the runway and storage facilities at the Abu al-Duhur base in northwest Syria.

The attacks, which were seen as a warning sign to Turkey to stop its military expansion in Syria, drew a sharp response from the Trump administration, which has emerged as a surprise supporter of the new jihadist Syrian regime, and criticised what it called an "unnecessary escalation."

A statement subsequently issued by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the aim of the attack was to stop Turkish military forces from deploying at the base. The statement said Israel and Syria had "agreed to a status quo in security matters" but that Damascus was "on the verge of breaching" the agreement by allowing Turkish troops to deploy at the airbase.

Israel had "repeatedly warned Syria" of the risk, the statement said, but "Syria chose to ignore these warnings."

Turkey dismissed the allegations as "frivolous".

The airstrikes nevertheless highlight the mounting concern within Israeli intelligence circles over Erdogan's expansionist designs in Syria.

Erdogan is one of the Middle East's most enthusiastic supporters of the extreme Islamist Muslim Brotherhood movement, as well as Islamist terror groups such as Hamas, among others. The Turkish leader was instrumental in helping Syria's jihadist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham organisation seize power in Damascus under the leadership of al-Sharaa, who previously had close affiliations with Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organisation.

After al-Sharaa was installed as Syria's new president -- a move backed by US President Donald J. Trump as well as other Western leaders -- Israel's intelligence establishment has become increasingly concerned about Turkey's growing influence in Syria, which Israel regards as posing a direct threat to its security.

Israeli officials increasingly regard Erdogan's aggressive posture, both domestically and across the region, as a matter of concern, as they do his constant efforts to reclaim the legacy of the Ottoman Empire.

Turkey's continued financial support for Hamas and its provision of safe haven to Hamas terrorists only adds to Israel's view of Turkey as a hostile actor, an attitude that is not helped by Erdogan's constant use of anti-Israel rhetoric in political campaigning and official communications. In June, for example, Turkey's interior minister called for the "liberation of Jerusalem."

In addition, Erdogan has stated that "Jerusalem is ours," and as recently as March 30, 2025, "May the Lord make Zionist Israel destroyed and devastated."

Erdogan published a 758-page document that outlines his long-term phased plan to take over "Israel, the Middle East and the Free world."

Amichai Chikli, Israel's Minister of Diaspora Affairs, said, "Ahmed al-Sharaa's military is Erdoğan's military. Al-Sharaa's ideology is Erdoğan's ideology. Erdoğan and al-Sharaa's ideology is Al Qaeda and ISIS ideology," and cited what he described as their barbaric treatment of non-Muslim minorities in the region.

Also increasingly questioned is the neutrality of Tom Barrack, US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy to Syria (here, here and here), amid announcements of his departure. It is to be hoped that he will not be granted a "key role" managing US policy in Syria and Iraq.

In an attempt to defuse tensions between Jerusalem and Ankara on the Syria issue, Israel and Turkey conducted talks in Azerbaijan in 2025 intended to agree on an understanding about the two countries' priorities in post-Assad Syria.

While details of the meeting were not made public, the two countries reached broad agreement on a status quo, the essence of which was to respect full Syrian sovereignty over its territory.

Despite this arrangement, Israeli intelligence officials have become increasingly uneasy about Erdogan's plans to expand and entrench Turkey's presence in the country.

Turkish forces currently occupy about 5,000 square kilometres of territory in northern Syria. Turkey has also reportedly taken control of Syrian military and naval bases previously used by Iran and Russia under the Assad regime, at a time when Moscow and Tehran were close allies of Damascus.

There are also concerns about Turkey's wider role in the region after it emerged that Erdogan personally intervened with Trump to block a proposed US-Israel operation whereby thousands of Kurdish fighters, supported by American air cover, would invade Iran with the aim of overthrowing the mullah regime, a plan many Israeli officials believe had a good chance of success had it not been for Erdogan's intervention.

Another potential threat that Syria could pose to Israel's long-term security concerns is the recent discovery of an undeclared nuclear base by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), where inspectors found several tons of nuclear material which Rafael Grossi, the IAEA's head, said "could be put to bad use."

These are among the many reasons that Israeli security officials are becoming so concerned about Turkey's deepening involvement in post-Assad Syria. They are increasingly of the view that, if Israel is to safeguard the future security of its people, it is vital that Erdogan not be allowed to pursue his expansionist aims in Syria and certainly not to have F-35 stealth fighter jets.

Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22815/syria-turkey-israel

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran's President admits US sanctions are hurting the economy - Israel National News

 

​ by Israel National News

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian admits US sanctions are hurting Iran's economy, days after insisting the measures would achieve nothing.

 

Masoud Pezeshkian                                                       ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect

 

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has acknowledged that US sanctions are having a significant impact on Iran's economy, reversing comments he made earlier this week that dismissed their effectiveness.

Speaking to Iranian state television late Friday, Pezeshkian addressed claims that sanctions have no effect, saying, “Some say sanctions have no effect at all; to those people, I really don’t know what to say."

He added, “We are in a war situation, and we must accept these wartime conditions."

Pezeshkian said Iran's imports and exports have declined by between 25% and 35% in recent months as the United States maintains a naval blockade of Iranian ports. He also called for an increase in the price of petrol to reflect the decline in trade.

“We should raise the price of the third-tier quota... For example, from 5,000 tomans to 10,000 tomans," he said. The third-tier quota is one of several fuel consumption rates used to determine the price paid by Iranian consumers.

Iran is a major oil producer and has among the world's lowest petrol prices due to extensive government subsidies. Any increase in fuel prices is therefore politically sensitive.

Iranian Vice President Mohammad Jafar Ghaempanah said Wednesday that the US blockade had prevented Tehran from importing sufficient petrol to compensate for a shortfall in domestic production. That same day, however, Pezeshkian had insisted that the latest US sanctions “will not achieve anything."

“We will stand firm against economic pressures, as we have done so far and will continue to do," he told Iranian state media at the time.

Pezeshkian's latest remarks came four days after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced plans for what he called the “economic asphyxiation" of Iran under "Operation Economic Outcast." Bessent warned that countries refusing to join the US campaign could face consequences.

Iranian officials have rejected the US pressure campaign. Economy Minister Ali Madanizadeh said Tehran was prepared to withstand the sanctions and predicted Washington would suffer “another defeat". He also said the Iranian government had developed a two-year strategy to manage the economic pressure.

“They have done everything they could to test the determination of the Iranian people and the country's officials, but they have failed every time. It seems they wished to suffer yet another defeat," Madanizadeh told Iranian state television.

“We've been waiting for these plans for a long time, and the government is and was ready and has a two-year plan to manage these events," he added.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi likewise argued that the expanded US economic campaign demonstrated that Washington had failed to achieve its military objectives.

“If Washington has achieved its goals, why is there a need for ‘the largest financial invasion in history’?" he asked, portraying the measures as evidence of US failure.

Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/432414

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

CBC allows reporters to describe 9/11 attacks as terrorism without attribution after backlash - Mathilda Heller

 

​ by Mathilda Heller

As previously reported by The Jerusalem Post on Thursday, the CBC circulated a memo last week to reporters and editors instructing them not to refer to the attacks as “terrorist attacks.”

 

A sign is seen at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation building in Toronto, March 25, 2009.

(photo credit: REUTERS/MARK BLINCH)

Following an international outcry about a memo advising reporters to not refer to 9/11 as 'terrorism,' CBC has announced it has revised its editorial guidelines on the matter.

As previously reported by The Jerusalem Post on Thursday, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) circulated a memo last week to reporters and editors instructing them not to refer to the attacks as “terrorist attacks.”

The memo was authored by Basem Boshra, senior director of journalistic standards and public trust at CBC News, and sent to reporters and editors.

CBC spokeswoman Kerry Kelly told the Post that it is the practice of the CBC to “exercise extreme caution before using the words terrorist and terrorism" and that the memo was a reminder of the "longstanding practice that favors the use of these terms with attribution in our reporting."

CBC News will adjust its 9/11 language guidance 

However, on Friday, Chuck Thompson, Head of Public Affairs at CBC, informed the Post that CBC News will adjust its 9/11 language guidance.

World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 (R) (credit: REUTERS/Sara K. Schwittek)

In a new editor's blog, Boshra (the author of the original memo), noted that "CBC News finds itself once again in a swirl of confusion about how our journalists use the words 'terrorist' and 'terrorism,' this time about the al-Qaeda attacks on New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001."

He noted that the memo caused significant concern, anger and hurt for people who "believe CBC News seeks to minimize or obscure the horror of that day and who was behind it," but said that "that is the last thing we want to do."

"CBC News has never said what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, was not terrorism, as some commentators have stated in recent days. We have reported fully and accurately on the reasons and motivations for those attacks as determined by police, governments and an independent commission."

"CBC's reporting on terrorism, wherever it occurs, has always been guided by the principle of attribution, and like other major news organizations, it has been our practice for decades," he said

Future reporting on other events will continue to require attribution

However, following the uproar, Boshra said that "after reviewing our current language guidance, we have decided to adjust it to clarify that direct attribution is not required for describing the historic events of 9/11 as terrorism."

"We are doing so to remove what has unfortunately (and unintentionally) become an impediment to clarity and public understanding," he said.

Future reporting on other events will continue to require attribution; the new guidance only changes the rule for 9/11. 

Mathilda Heller

Source: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-906971

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Christian leaders urge Trump to create legal pathway for Jewish Canadians facing antisemitism - Nicholas Ballasy

 

​ by Nicholas Ballasy

The National Association of Christian Lawmakers and its partners asked the administration to direct the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to develop “lawful, secure, and appropriately expedited pathways” for eligible Jewish Canadian nationals and their immediate family members.

 

A coalition of Christian lawmakers, faith leaders and civic organizations urged President Donald Trump to establish a legal immigration and humanitarian pathway for Jewish Canadians who fear persecution resulting from rising antisemitism in Canada.

In a letter sent to Trump, the National Association of Christian Lawmakers and its partners asked the administration to direct the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to develop “lawful, secure, and appropriately expedited pathways” for eligible Jewish Canadian nationals and their immediate family members.

The letter pointed to what the signatories described as a growing climate of harassment, intimidation, vandalism, threats and violence targeting Jewish communities in Canada since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel.

“These numbers represent more than statistics,” the letter read. “They represent families who increasingly question whether they can safely send their children to Jewish schools, worship openly, display their faith publicly, or continue building their lives in communities where they no longer feel secure.”

The group said any immigration program should have remain subject to existing law and national-security screening, including identity, criminal-history, medical and admissibility checks.

The letter also cited growing interest among Jewish Canadians in relocating to the United States. 

Advocates working with affected families reportedly said more than 2,000 Jewish Canadians had expressed interest in moving because of concerns about their safety, the letter said.

The authors pointed specifically to Oklahoma, writing that Jewish and Christian leaders in Tulsa had offered to help receive Jewish Canadian families. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt had also communicated his willingness to welcome Jewish families seeking safety and opportunity, according to the letter.

The coalition argued that potential immigrants should not be viewed solely as refugees, but as prospective members of American communities.

“They bring talent, faith, family values, entrepreneurship, and a sincere desire to contribute to the Nation that offers them safety and religious liberty,” the letter said.

The signatories applauded Trump for his stated efforts to combat antisemitism and defend religious liberty while urging him to take decisive action on this particular issue.

“Religious liberty must be more than a principle we proclaim; it must be a principle we are willing to defend,” the letter concluded. 

Nicholas Ballasy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/christian-leaders-urge-trump-create-legal-pathway-jewish-canadians-facing

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran's Regime: 'The Only Solution Is to Build a Nuclear Bomb and Fire It' - Majid Rafizadeh

 

​ by Majid Rafizadeh

What Happens After President Trump Leaves Office?

 

• "The only way to save the country... is building an atomic bomb and firing it, no other way is left for us. We should create a tsunami whose waves hit the American coasts." — Iranian cleric Mohammad Bagher Kharrazi, secretary-general of Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, and closely tied to Iran's current Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei

• The real question needs to be: What happens after Trump leaves office?

• The regime's character — Islamist, anti-Western, anti-American and expansionist — has not changed. If Western powers are truly serious, they must work to completely eliminate Iran's present regime.

• Recent developments show the danger of permitting recovery. Iran's army is claiming that weapons systems damaged in the 2026 war have already been "rebuilt" -- either domestically or after having been imported, and with a shift toward offensive capabilities. Satellite imagery and intelligence assessments reveal rapid reconstruction of missile bases, tunnel entrances, production facilities, and infrastructure — faster than many anticipated. Israeli officials have expressed surprise at the speed of recovery in ballistic missile capabilities. Leaving these arsenals in place would simply make further military efforts more dangerous both for US bases and allies in the Gulf. Any rebuilding of Iran's military infrastructure must be disrupted; leaders driving this belligerency need to be removed from power.

• Economic isolation also remains critical, as US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has laid out, complete with universally enforced secondary sanctions. The European Union should close remaining diplomatic and commercial channels that provide legitimacy or revenue.

• The West should not have to wait for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon -- when it would be impossible to stop, which is why the regime wants one -- before taking Iran's threats seriously. The war with the Iranian regime -- to contradict those who claim it was a war of choice – is anything but that. Iran, China and Russia have been trying to take down Western civilization for decades. Only Trump had the vision and the determination to take on these threats.

• For both US and international security, it is obligatory for the world's leading superpower, the United States of America, to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and to protect countless lives. Iran's regime must not be allowed to rebuild its military or remain in power. Every available measure needs to be pursued until the Islamic Republic of Iran is totally dismantled. For decades, half-measures have failed.

• The alternative is for the West's nuclear-capable adversaries -- whose "only solution" will assuredly put the world at risk -- to succeed in their mission.

In the ideology of Iran's ruling establishment, nuclear weapons are still openly contemplated not just as a deterrent but as instruments of mass destruction. If an extremist regime acquires a nuclear weapon, the question is: What happens afterwards? The regime's character — Islamist, anti-Western, anti-American and expansionist — has not changed. If Western powers are truly serious, they must work to completely eliminate Iran's present regime. Pictured: Crowds gather for the funeral procession of Iran's late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, in Mashhad, on July 9, 2026. (Photo by Wakil Kohsar/AFP via Getty Images)

For anyone who has ever harbored doubts—and for those who still do—that Iran's regime stands against humanity, peace, and the basic norms of civilization, the latest remarks from hard-line Iranian cleric Mohammad Bagher Kharrazi -- secretary-general of Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, and closely tied to the current Supreme Leader -- should be impossible to ignore. "The only way to save the country... is building an atomic bomb and firing it," Kharrazi recently declared, "no other way is left for us.... We should create a tsunami whose waves hit the American coasts".

In the ideology of Iran's ruling establishment, nuclear weapons are still openly contemplated not just as a deterrent but as instruments of mass destruction. If an extremist regime acquires a nuclear weapon, the question is: What happens afterwards?

Iran's primary target, of course, remains Israel. Iranian leaders and their proxies have long framed the Jewish state's destruction as a religious and strategic mission, if not obligation. Israel's compact size, roughly the same as New Jersey (22,000 sq. km.), means that even a single nuclear weapon would cause catastrophic destruction. Moreover, nuclear weapons capability — or the materials and know-how — could be easily transferred to proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, or others. These groups have already attacked civilians, shipping, and their neighboring states not even involved in a dispute. A nuclear-armed Iranian regime, or one that arms its network, also assures a regional arms race – already begun by Saudi Arabia trying to build the infrastructure for uranium enrichment, for "peaceful purposes," of course -- at least until they are not.

US President Donald J. Trump has not treated Iran's nuclear ambitions as an ordinary diplomatic disagreement. He has repeated that "Iran Cannot Have a Nuclear Weapon." A regime whose voices openly discuss building and "firing" nuclear weapons, with scenarios of tsunamis against America, cannot be trusted with such capability. This is the language of ideological fanaticism from a theocracy that has spent nearly half a century exporting its revolution, funding terrorism, and crushing dissent at home, complete with the slaughter of "at least 42,000" of its own citizens in just two days, on January 8 and 9, 2026.

The problem is compounded by the fact that Iran's brutal Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) regime itself remains firmly in place. Iran's new leadership structure has continued to elevate hard-line figures with deep IRGC backgrounds. Under Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, key security and military posts have been filled with veteran IRGC hardliners — the old guard of anti-American, anti-Israeli ideologues associated with the era of Qasem Soleimani. Appointments of men such as Mohsen Rezaei to the Supreme National Security Council and Ahmad Vahidi to lead the IRGC, rather than signaling any pragmatic shift, instead point to the commitment of Iran's current leaders to outlast Trump's term of office.

The real question needs to be: What happens after Trump leaves office?

Meanwhile, repression inside Iran continues. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk reported that at least 56 people had been executed on national-security charges since March 19, including 27 allegedly involved in the protests earlier this year. Human rights organizations have also documented expedited trials and death sentences against protesters.

The regime's character — Islamist, anti-Western, anti-American and expansionist — has not changed. If Western powers are truly serious, they must work to completely eliminate Iran's present regime.

Recent developments show the danger of permitting recovery. Iran's army is claiming that weapons systems damaged in the 2026 war have already been "rebuilt" -- either domestically or after having been imported, and with a shift toward offensive capabilities. Satellite imagery and intelligence assessments reveal rapid reconstruction of missile bases, tunnel entrances, production facilities, and infrastructure — faster than many anticipated. Israeli officials have expressed surprise at the speed of recovery in ballistic missile capabilities. Leaving these arsenals in place would simply make further military efforts more dangerous both for US bases and allies in the Gulf. Any rebuilding of Iran's military infrastructure must be disrupted; leaders driving this belligerency need to be removed from power.

Economic isolation also remains critical, as US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has laid out, complete with universally enforced secondary sanctions. The European Union should close remaining diplomatic and commercial channels that provide legitimacy or revenue.

The West should not have to wait for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon -- when it would be impossible to stop, which is why the regime wants one -- before taking Iran's threats seriously. The war with the Iranian regime -- to contradict those who claim it was a war of choice – is anything but that. Iran, China and Russia have been trying to take down Western civilization for decades. Only Trump had the vision and the determination to take on these threats.

For both US and international security, it is obligatory for the world's leading superpower, the United States of America, to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and to protect countless lives. Iran's regime must not be allowed to rebuild its military or remain in power. Every available measure needs to be pursued until the Islamic Republic of Iran is totally dismantled. For decades, half-measures have failed.

The alternative is for the West's nuclear-capable adversaries -- whose "only solution" will assuredly put the world at risk -- to succeed in their mission.

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)

 

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22818/iran-regime-nuclear-bomb

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter