Israel

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US domestic elections play key role in its foreign policy | Letters

      by

      Jonathan Freedland’s perceptive analysis of the progress/decline of Northern Ireland and Israel respectively since 1998 misses one important dynamic (Netanyahu is leading a coup against his own country. But the threat is not only to Israel, 31 March): the role the American domestic electoral cycle plays in influencing US foreign policy.I worked in Washington DC for the congressman Gary Ackerman (Democrat, Queens, New York) from 1989 to 1990. The substantial Jewish-American and Irish-American populations in his congressional district led Gary to take dramatically contrasting positions to Israel and Northern Ireland. Whereas he backed Israel’s policies without question, he also seemed to be a staunch supporter of Irish republicanism.This electoral imperative is, arguably, an important factor why US representatives who are not Irish-American have been members of the Irish caucus in Congress over the years. The importance of re-election is one reason why the Good Friday agreement is sacrosanct in Washington, and the lack of such a motive with regards to Palestinian issues hinders resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.Michael HerronLondon I always value Jonathan Freedland’s commentaries, never more so than at present, when Israel is fighting for its democratic soul. I feel anguished to see the democratic hopes and ideals of Israel’s founders torn to shreds by this far-right government.Jonathan Freedland provides a compass and wake-up call for all who care about Israel’s future, and I am grateful for that. I support the democratic movement which, hopefully, will continue to gather momentum, in Israel and among the diaspora. Elizabeth Barnell Shrewsbury, Shropshire More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Israel’s Far-Right Government Backs Down, for Now

      by

      Mary Wilson and Sydney Harper and Patricia Willens and Diane Wong and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | Amazon MusicFor months in Israel, the far-right government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing a highly contentious plan to fundamentally change the country’s Supreme Court, setting off some of the largest demonstrations in Israel’s history.On Monday, Mr. Netanyahu announced that he would delay his government’s campaign. Patrick Kingsley, the Jerusalem bureau chief for The New York Times, explains the prime minister’s surprising concession.On today’s episodePatrick Kingsley, the Jerusalem bureau chief for The New York Times.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, center. The country is in the throes of a political crisis that has ballooned in recent days.Maya Alleruzzo/Associated PressBackground readingMr. Netanyahu delayed his bid to overhaul Israel’s judiciary in the face of furious protests.Israel’s prime minister is caught between his far-right coalition and public anger over the government’s plan to weaken the judiciary.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.Patrick Kingsley More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      With Judicial Overhaul Paused, U.S. Softens Tone on Netanyahu

      by

      News that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be welcomed in Washington came a day after the Israeli leader delayed plans to limit the power of the courts and signaled a calmer atmosphere.In a sign of easing tensions in Israel after the suspension of a contentious judicial overhaul, the United States ambassador to Israel said on Tuesday that President Biden would host the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in Washington in the coming months, but did not specify a date.The possibility of such a meeting, long coveted by Mr. Netanyahu, came after other shifts in tone overnight from the Biden administration, as Washington signaled its support for Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to delay the divisive judicial plan.But the news did not suggest a complete reset after weeks of fraught relations: The ambassador, Thomas R. Nides, said that no date had been fixed for any meeting, leaving open the possibility that it could be delayed if Mr. Netanyahu pushed ahead with the plan after a delay.The news was nevertheless one of several signs on Tuesday that emotions were calming across Israel after concerns over the judicial overhaul had set off civil unrest on a scale rarely seen in the country and had exacerbated tensions with the Biden administration.After Mr. Netanyahu’s reversal, the country’s leading union called off a general strike, hospitals resumed full services after reducing them in protest on Monday, and the main airport began to allow outbound flights again after putting them on hold a day earlier.But suspicion and disappointment on both sides remained. Protesters feared that the government would resume the overhaul after only a superficial delay, and some demonstrations were still scheduled for Tuesday. And some government supporters complained that their views and goals had been crushed despite right-wing parties’ winning a majority in an election last November.The comments from Mr. Nides came the morning after Mr. Netanyahu made a last-minute decision to delay the overhaul. Opponents to the government plan had begun a general strike that shut down large parts of the Israeli economy, shuttering universities and schools, stopping outgoing flights, and pausing nonurgent medical services.Protesters in Jerusalem rallying against the proposed judicial overhaul on Monday. Israel had been gripped by turmoil in recent days as mass demonstrations and strikes swept across the country.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesThe Biden administration had avoided extending an invitation to Mr. Netanyahu in recent weeks as officials in Washington grew increasingly concerned about the pace of the judicial overhaul, its effect on Israeli social cohesion and its consequences for Israeli democracy — as well as about the Netanyahu government’s policies in the occupied West Bank.“There’s no question that the prime minister will come and see President Biden,” Mr. Nides said in an interview on Tuesday morning on Israeli radio.“He obviously will be coming,” Mr. Nides said, adding, “I assume after Passover.” The Jewish festival of Passover ends on April 13.Reached by phone, Mr. Nides said that no fixed date had been set for the visit. The Israeli prime minister’s office did not issue a response.Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to delay the judicial overhaul, days before its enactment, led to the postponement of several further protests this week. Opponents of the overhaul still fear he could reinstate it later in the year and say they will not hesitate to organize further demonstrations if he reverses course again. Opposition lawmakers accused the government of playing a double game by delaying the legislation while also taking procedural measures that would make it swifter to vote on the package in Parliament in the future. The coalition said that was simply a technical move.More generally among the opposition, there was a sense of relief.“This morning, we are allowed to rejoice a little,” Nadav Eyal, a columnist for Yedioth Ahronoth, a major centrist broadsheet, wrote on Tuesday morning. “Israeli democracy may die one day,” he added. “But it will not happen this week, nor this month, nor this spring.”Nonetheless, many in the opposition remain worried that the overhaul has been delayed but not scrapped entirely. There were also fears about Mr. Netanyahu’s promise to Itamar Ben-Gvir, the far-right minister for national security, that he would consider creating a national guard under Mr. Ben-Gvir’s control.Itamar Ben-Gvir, the far-right Israeli minister for national security, in Jerusalem on Monday night.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesCritics warned that if Mr. Netanyahu followed through on that proposal, made after Mr. Ben-Gvir agreed to remain in the government despite the delay to the overhaul, it would effectively place a paramilitary body under the control of a man convicted of racist incitement and support for a terrorist group.In a statement, Mr. Ben-Gvir said that the body — which has yet to be created — would prevent rioting and “strengthen security and governance in the country.”There was also uncertainty about the future of Yoav Gallant, the defense minister fired by Mr. Netanyahu on Sunday night after Mr. Gallant called for a halt to the overhaul.Mr. Gallant’s dismissal has not formally taken effect, and Israeli commentators speculated that Mr. Netanyahu may yet allow him to keep his job.Among government supporters, there were feelings of uncertainty, disappointment and resentment at Mr. Netanyahu’s inability to push through the legislation, even though right-wing parties had won a majority in Parliament in the general election in November.“At school they told me that Israel is a democracy,” Evyatar Cohen, a commentator for Srugim, a right-wing news outlet, wrote. “They said that as soon as I reach the age of 18 I can go to the polls and influence the future of the country, its character and goals.”Government supporters organized small protests overnight, with some attacking journalists and an Arab taxi driver, and chanting against Arabs. Some formed a roadblock in northern Israel, stopping drivers from an area associated with the centrist opposition.Gabby Sobelman More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The DeSantis Foreign Policy: Hard Power, but With a High Bar

      by

      The Florida governor has never been the internationalist that some old-guard Republicans wanted or imagined him to be. A close reading of his record reveals how he might lead the U.S. abroad.When Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida made headlines recently by undercutting U.S. support for Ukraine, Republican hawks, many of whom cling to him as their only hope to defeat former President Donald J. Trump, wondered if they had misread him as an ideological ally.Mr. DeSantis ditched his previous backing for Ukraine to align himself with the increasingly nationalistic Republican base, which he will need to win the 2024 presidential primary if he runs. But he was never the committed internationalist that some old-guard Republicans had wanted or imagined him to be.Until now, Mr. DeSantis served as a Rorschach test for Republicans. There was, conveniently, something in his record to please each of the party’s ideological factions, and he had every incentive to be all things to all Republicans for as long as he could get away with it.Hawks had claimed Mr. DeSantis as their own for his fervent support of Israel and his denunciations of China, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela. And restraint-oriented Republicans had claimed Mr. DeSantis for his 2013 decision, as a congressman, to break with Republican hawks and oppose President Barack Obama’s requests to intervene militarily in Syria.Mr. DeSantis during a visit to Jerusalem in 2019. He has been a fervent supporter of Israel. Jeffrey Schweers – Usa Today NetworkYet, despite his policy shifts and inconsistencies — this week, he said he had failed to make himself clear on Ukraine and called President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia a “war criminal” — Mr. DeSantis’s worldview is not a mystery.Unusually for a governor, Mr. DeSantis, whose spokeswoman declined interview requests, has a long paper trail on foreign policy. A close reading of more than 200 of his speeches, votes, writings and television commentaries over the past decade, as well as interviews with his peers, reveal the makings of a DeSantis Doctrine.‘Just a Jacksonian’Tucked between the campaign boilerplate in Mr. DeSantis’s new book, “The Courage to Be Free,” is a short chapter describing how his service in Iraq, as an officer in the Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps, reinforced his doubts about former President George W. Bush’s “messianic impulse.”“Bush sketched out a view for American foreign policy that constituted Wilsonianism on steroids,” Mr. DeSantis writes, referring to former President Woodrow Wilson’s idealistic liberal internationalism after World War I. He recalls his reaction to a line in Mr. Bush’s second inaugural address: “The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.”“I remember being stunned,” Mr. DeSantis writes. “Does the survival of American liberty depend on whether liberty succeeds in Djibouti?”Mr. DeSantis’s analysis of Mr. Bush’s attempt to use the military to “socially engineer a foreign society” is the sort of thing one hears from conservative elites who call themselves Jacksonians, after President Andrew Jackson, the 19th-century populist. Though The New York Times could find no public record of the Florida governor describing himself as a Jacksonian, the word kept coming up in interviews with people who know Mr. DeSantis.“I think he’s kind of dead-center where Republican voters are, which is to say that he’s neither an isolationist nor a neoconservative, he’s just a Jacksonian,” said David Reaboi, a conservative national security strategist whom Mr. DeSantis has hosted at the governor’s mansion.Mr. Reaboi was referring to a 1999 essay by the academic Walter Russell Mead, “The Jacksonian Tradition and American Foreign Policy,” which is still in heavy circulation on the intellectual right. It defines a Jacksonian as having a narrow conception of the U.S. national interest: protection of its territory, its people, its hard assets and its commercial interests overseas.A Jacksonian does not dream of implanting “American values” on foreign soil. He or she believes that if the U.S. military is to be deployed, it should use as much force as necessary to achieve a quick, clearly defined “victory,” with as few American casualties as possible. A Jacksonian cares little about lopsided casualty counts — so long as they’re in America’s favor — or about international law.Unlike Mr. Trump, a fellow Jacksonian but one who operates on pure instinct and would never dream of suffering through a foreign policy treatise, Mr. DeSantis has read deeply and has formed a philosophy about America’s place in the world. But you will rarely hear Mr. DeSantis invoke abstract values to justify the use of force — as some of his potential 2024 rivals and current party leaders have done.He has not framed the Ukraine war as a battle for “freedom,” as former Vice President Mike Pence has done, or as a mission to defend the post-World War II international security framework, as Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, has done. If Mr. DeSantis is elected president, there is unlikely to be any more Biden-esque talk of “autocracies versus democracies.” In Mr. DeSantis’s framing, these are the idealistic mutterings of a “Wilsonian.”Tucked between the campaign boilerplate in Mr. DeSantis’s new book are ideas similar to those one hears from conservative elites who call themselves Jacksonians, after President Andrew Jackson, the 19th-century populist.Jordan Gale for The New York TimesMr. DeSantis’s former House colleagues could not recall him ever worrying about whether girls got an education in Afghanistan or whether democracy could be spread throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Instead, they recall him expressing a hard-nosed and narrow view of the American national interest.“After law school, Governor DeSantis didn’t take a Wall Street job or join a human rights N.G.O.,” said Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who served with Mr. DeSantis in the House and remains close to him. “He joined the military, which both reflected his worldview and probably further shaped it, as did his choice to serve six years on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.”Mr. DeSantis favors a robust U.S. military. A President DeSantis would most likely increase military spending; as a House member, he spoke approvingly of Mr. Trump’s increase of the Pentagon’s budget.In Iraq, one of Mr. DeSantis’s jobs was to provide counsel to commanders on the rules governing the battlefield. He saw his role as being a “facilitator, not an inhibitor,” he writes in his new book. He chafed at what he viewed as overly restrictive rules of engagement..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.“It is unacceptable to send someone wearing our nation’s uniform to a combat zone with one hand tied behind his back,” Mr. DeSantis writes. “War is hell, and it puts the lives of our military personnel at risk if operations get mired in bureaucracy and red tape.”Mr. DeSantis’s Jacksonianism predates the presidency of Mr. Trump.In 2013 and 2014, Mr. DeSantis broke with Republican hawks who were encouraging Mr. Obama to intervene militarily in Syria. Mr. DeSantis rejected the idea of missile strikes to respond to President Bashar al-Assad’s use of gas. And he voted against an amendment that would have authorized Mr. Obama to train and equip vetted Syrian rebels, because “mujahedeen fighters in Syria are not moderates nor are they pro-American.”Contempt for the State Department and the United NationsMr. DeSantis has often cited the writings of the late conservative intellectual Angelo Codevilla — and in particular his 2010 book, “The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It.”Mr. Codevilla, whose book came out at the height of the Tea Party movement, describes a permanent “ruling class” in Washington that looks down on the rest of the country and “makes decisions about war and peace at least as much forcibly to tinker with the innards of foreign bodies politic as to protect America.”This ruling class — a phrase Mr. DeSantis has co-opted — includes both the Republican and Democratic Party establishments. In his telling, these elites have pursued an unpatriotic agenda: They have assigned the U.S. military unwinnable and therefore demoralizing missions, and have been too generous to foreigners.Mr. DeSantis is widely seen as the strongest potential challenger to former President Donald J. Trump in the 2024 Republican presidential primary race.Scott Olson/Getty ImagesThis mental model defines how Mr. DeSantis thinks about the State Department and international institutions like the United Nations.In a floor speech on Jan. 5, 2017, Mr. DeSantis called for defunding the U.N. until the Security Council revoked a resolution condemning Israeli settlements as violations of international law.Mr. DeSantis derides the foreign policy professionals at the State Department to such an extent that it’s difficult to imagine him meeting with them, let alone listening to their advice. Mr. DeSantis has complained that the State Department is “Arabist in outlook” and “all in” with the Muslim Brotherhood.To the right of Trump on IsraelIn the early days of the Trump administration, the most pro-Israel president in living memory wasn’t pro-Israel enough for Mr. DeSantis, who was still a congressman. On Jun. 1, 2017, Mr. DeSantis issued a statement condemning Mr. Trump for delaying a decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.Public records show that Mr. DeSantis took only three foreign trips as a House member and has taken one foreign trip as governor. All were to Israel.In March 2017, Mr. DeSantis flew to Israel and scouted potential sites for the U.S. Embassy to heap public pressure on Mr. Trump to keep his campaign promise. Mr. DeSantis later pushed Mr. Trump to recognize the Golan Heights as Israeli territory — another controversial move.Mr. DeSantis has promised to be the “most pro-Israel governor in America” — a stance that helps him with both Jewish and evangelical constituents in Florida.Mr. DeSantis inserting a prayer for a safe Florida hurricane season in the Western Wall in Jerusalem during a visit in 2019. Jeff Schweers – USA TODAY NETWORKHe has used his powers as governor to pressure American companies to drop their boycotts of Israel. He took on Unilever over the decision by one of its companies, Ben & Jerry’s, not to sell ice cream in the occupied territories. Mr. DeSantis added Unilever to Florida’s “scrutinized companies” list, and Unilever reversed its decision. He used the same tactic against Airbnb — successfully pressuring the company to reverse itself over eliminating listings in Israeli settlements.As president, Mr. DeSantis would not be expected to dissuade Israel from annexing further land. He has referred to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria,” using the biblical names for the territory used by right-wing Israelis.During his first year in office, Mr. Trump briefly gestured at considering the Palestinian point of view. He even hosted the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, at the White House. It is hard to imagine Mr. DeSantis doing the same.In early 2018, when Mr. Trump was still aiming for what he called “the ultimate deal” between the Israelis and the Palestinians, Mr. DeSantis told the Heritage Foundation that a peace deal was not “worth spending capital on.”China superhawkAs governor, Mr. DeSantis has sought to restrict Chinese investments in Florida. His actions against the Chinese Communist Party suggest that as president, his China policy would be more comprehensively aggressive than Mr. Trump’s. But he seems to care less about trade issues than Mr. Trump did, and more about security concerns.Mr. DeSantis appears less likely to chase a Chinese trade deal, as Mr. Trump did for most of his presidency, and more likely to accelerate efforts to block Chinese investments in the U.S., especially in the high-tech and security sectors. (President Biden has kept Mr. Trump’s China tariffs.)In February, the DeSantis office announced a proposal to ban TikTok and “other social media platforms with ties to China” from state government devices.Mr. DeSantis has promised legislation to stop people or companies with China ties from buying “agricultural land and lands surrounding military bases,” and he plans to ban gifts to Florida universities from people or companies connected to the Chinese Communist Party.Political calculation and inconsistenciesMr. DeSantis’s recent statement that defending Ukraine was not a vital U.S. interest came after CNN unearthed comments he made in 2015 — which were circulated by people in Mr. Trump’s orbit — urging Mr. Obama to do more to defend Ukraine against Russia. As soon as Mr. DeSantis pivoted, the Trump campaign attacked him as a flip-flopping fake.If it was a politically calculated shift by Mr. DeSantis, it would not have been the first.On Sept. 9, 2013, Mr. DeSantis told Fox News that he accepted the Obama administration’s evidence that the Syrian government had gassed its people. But this, Mr. DeSantis argued, did not justify missile strikes against Syria, which he said risked escalating the conflict.Mr. DeSantis sounded different when the president firing missiles in response to Syrian gas was Mr. Trump. In a Fox News appearance on April 15, 2018, Mr. DeSantis said, “The strikes did what they were intended to do.”Nor has Mr. DeSantis been entirely consistent in his Jacksonianism. Speaking on a foreign policy issue that is politically potent in Florida, he can sound positively Wilsonian. He told the Venezuelan people in 2017, “We hear your cries of freedom.”Mr. DeSantis encouraged Mr. Trump — who ended up pushing unsuccessfully for regime change in Venezuela — “to apply additional pressure on the Maduro regime.” More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Your Thursday Briefing: Key Meetings for Biden and Putin

      by

      Also, another deadly Israeli raid in the West Bank and South Korea’s fight over L.G.B.T.Q. rights.In this photograph, provided by Russian state media, President Vladimir Putin meets with China’s top foreign policy official at the Kremlin.Anton Novoderezhkin/Sputnik, via ReutersBiden and Putin build up alliancesPresident Biden met with leaders from NATO’s eastern flank in Warsaw, while President Vladimir Putin welcomed China’s top diplomat, Wang Yi, in Moscow. As Russia’s war in Ukraine appears set to drag on, both are trying to shore up allegiances.Biden reminded Eastern European leaders that they know “what’s at stake in this conflict, not just for Ukraine, but for the freedom of democracies throughout Europe and around the world.” He vowed to defend America’s NATO allies, which are most at risk from Russia’s aggression.In his talks with Wang, Putin noted that President Xi Jinping of China was expected to visit Russia, but indicated that the meeting had yet to be confirmed. The Kremlin is working to keep China in Russia’s corner amid a flurry of diplomacy across Europe by Beijing. The threat of U.S. sanctions looms if China were to increase its economic support for Russia.A pro-war rally: Putin told a crowd of tens of thousands of people gathered at a Moscow stadium that “there is a battle underway on our historical borders, for our people.” It was probably the most public celebration of war that Russia has mounted since the invasion.The battleground: A barrage of Russian missiles struck Kharkiv, in northeastern Ukraine, and nearly a dozen explosions were reported overnight in Russian-held territory, including in Mariupol, which suggests that Ukraine has increased attacks on Russian positions deep behind the front lines.The aftermath of clashes in the West Bank city of Nablus.Majdi Mohammed/Associated Press10 Palestinians killed in Israeli raidPalestinian officials said at least 10 Palestinians were killed and more than 100 others wounded in an hourslong gun battle between Israeli security forces and armed Palestinian groups in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The region is bracing for more unrest.Israel’s military said that the rare daytime firefight occurred during an operation to arrest Palestinian gunmen in Nablus. Six of the dead were fighters, several armed Palestinian groups said. But four had no known affiliation with any armed faction. Videos circulating on social media seemed to show that at least two people were shot with their backs to gunfire.Palestinian officials say this has been the deadliest start to a year for Palestinians in the West Bank since 2000, prompting comparisons with the Palestinian insurgency known as the second intifada. Nearly 60 Palestinians have been killed so far.The State of the WarBiden’s Kyiv Visit: President Biden traveled covertly to the besieged Ukrainian capital, hoping to demonstrate American resolve and boost shellshocked Ukrainians. But the trip was also the first of several direct challenges to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.Contrasting Narratives: In sharply opposed speeches, Mr. Biden said Mr. Putin bore sole responsibility for the war, while Mr. Putin said Russia had invaded in self-defense. But they agreed the war would not end soon.Nuclear Treaty: Mr. Putin announced that Russia would suspend its participation in the New START nuclear arms control treaty — the last major such agreement remaining with the United States.In the North: A different sort of war game is playing out in northern Ukraine, where Russian shelling is tying up thousands of Ukrainian troops that might otherwise defend against attacks farther south.A heavy toll: Palestinians say there’s an increased readiness among Israeli soldiers to shoot to kill. Israelis attribute the high death toll to a proliferation of guns and an increased readiness among Palestinians to fire instead of surrendering. Analysts said the timing of the raids — during the day instead of during the night, when the army usually conducts its operations — was a factor. During the day, residents are more likely to get caught in the crossfire or join the clashes.A Pride event in Seoul last year.Anthony Wallace/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSouth Korea’s stalled same-sex equality billL.G.B.T.Q. people in South Korea got a welcome victory this week when a court ordered the national health insurance service to provide spousal coverage to same-sex couples. But a broader bill that aims to prevent discrimination against sexual minorities is being blocked in the National Assembly.The Anti-Discrimination Act, which was first introduced decades ago, has faced tough opposition from a powerful Christian conservative lobby, despite the growing social acceptance of sexual minorities in South Korea. Opponents of the bill say their ranks are growing. They have prayed in public against the bill, flooded politicians’ phones with texts and persuaded school boards to remove books with transgender characters from libraries.Public support: A recent Gallup poll found that about 57 percent of adults in South Korea were in favor of the broader bill. Supporters see the failure to pass it as an example of how laws are out of step with the times.Region: Legislation recognizing same-sex equality has found support in other Asian countries. In Thailand, a law protecting queer rights took effect in 2015. In Taiwan, discrimination against sexual minorities has been illegal for about 15 years.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificThe chip maker announced the factory expansion in December.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesA Taiwanese computer chip giant’s $40 billion investment in an Arizona factory has stoked apprehension among employees.The disappearance of Bao Fan, a deal maker in China’s tech industry, threatens to upend Beijing’s promise to support private enterprise, our columnist Li Yuan writes.A U.S. judge rejected a bid by families of Sept. 11 victims to seize $3.5 billion in frozen Afghan funds as compensation for their losses.Around the WorldA British court upheld a ruling that stripped a woman of her citizenship after she left the country to join ISIS in Syria as a teenager.The U.S. government could run out of cash by summer if it doesn’t raise the debt limit, according to a new estimate.Nearly all of the U.S. is experiencing ice, snow or unseasonably warm temperatures this week. Air travel has been disrupted.An alligator killed an 85-year-old woman on a walk with her dog in Florida.Science NewsNew research shows that PFAS compounds, linked to cancer, are turning up in wild animal species around the world.In people with advanced H.I.V., mpox has a death rate of about 15 percent, researchers reported.Scientists say a drought in Argentina last year was not directly caused by climate change, but global warming was a factor in the extreme heat that made it worse.A Morning ReadNate Ryan for The New York TimesRaghavan Iyer has by some estimations taught more Americans how to cook Indian food than anyone else. For five years, he has been living with cancer. Now, in his final days, Iyer is building a database of comfort-food recipes, organized by cuisine and medical condition, for other terminally ill patients.He’s also getting ready for the release of his final book, an exploration of curry powder, which comes out next week.ARTS AND IDEASRam Charan, left, and N.T. Rama Rao Jr., dancing during “Naatu Naatu.”DVV EntertainmentHow a dance hit came together“Naatu Naatu,” from the Indian blockbuster “RRR,” is nominated for the Academy Award for best original song, a first for an Indian production.Set in 1920s colonial India, the film features “Naatu Naatu” in a scene where two friends square off against a British bully who wants to eject them from a lawn party. The director, S.S. Rajamouli, conceived the musical number as a kind of fight sequence, with fiery steps instead of punches. (You can watch it here.)The giddy choreography and propulsive rhythm draw from local traditions. The song’s composer used Indian skin drums called duffs, whose sound he compared to the traditional beats of folk songs celebrated in villages. In Telugu, the language of the film, “naatu” means “raw and rustic.”For more: Read our review of “RRR.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookAndrew Scrivani for The New York TimesThese vegan banana cookies are a good breakfast treat.What to Read“Sink,” a memoir, recounts a Black boyhood in Philadelphia.What to Listen toSZA’s “SOS” is now the longest-running No. 1 album by a woman since Adele’s “25” seven years ago.Where to GoSki in Sälen, a snowy Swedish fairy tale.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and here’s a clue: Cried (four letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. A.O. Scott, The Times’s longtime film critic, will move to the Book Review to write essays and reviews that grapple with literature, ideas and intellectual life.“The Daily” is about U.S. moves to legalize psychedelics as a medical treatment.We welcome your feedback. Please email thoughts and suggestions to briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Protesters Head to Jerusalem as Israel’s Leaders Look to Rein in Judges

      by

      Two contentious bills were scheduled to come up for an initial vote in Israel’s Parliament on Monday, including one that would reduce the power of the Supreme Court.JERUSALEM — Tens of thousands of protesters gathered in Jerusalem for the second straight Monday as Israel’s far-right government pushed forward with a divisive plan for a judicial overhaul that critics say will weaken and politicize the country’s courts and undermine its democratic foundations.Protesters, many of them arriving in convoys from across Israel, blocked highways en route to the city then gathered near the Parliament, where legislators were preparing for the first phase of voting on two bills aimed at curbing judicial oversight and giving politicians more influence over the courts.One bill would change the makeup of a nine-member committee that selects judges to reduce the influence of legal professionals on the body and give representatives and appointees of the government an automatic majority. The change would effectively allow the government of the day to choose judges.The other bill would strip the Supreme Court of its power to strike down basic laws passed by Parliament.Advocates say the changes are needed to curb the influence of an overreaching judiciary that has granted itself increased authority over the years. They also say the measures would shift power away from an unelected bureaucratic elite — the judiciary — in favor of elected officials and governments that reflect the will of the people.Israel’s New Far-Right GovernmentBenjamin Netanyahu has returned to power at the helm of the most right-wing and religiously conservative administration ever in Israeli history.A Hard-Right Agenda: Israel’s new government has moved quickly on several agenda items that would weaken the judiciary, entrench Israeli control of the West Bank and strengthen ultraconservative Jews.Judicial Overhaul: The government is pressing ahead with a far-reaching overhaul of Israel’s judicial system, setting off mass protests by those who say it will destroy the country’s democratic foundations.​​Rising Tensions: The roots of the recent spasm of violence in Israel and the West Bank predate the new government, but the administration’s ministers and goals are fueling tensions.Ultra-Orthodox Parties: To preserve his new government, Mr. Netanyahu has made a string of promises to Israel’s ultra-Orthodox parties. Their push for greater autonomy has potentially broad-ranging implications.Critics say the proposed overhaul would place unchecked power in the hands of the government, remove protections afforded to individuals and minorities and deepen divisions in an already fractured society. They also fear that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is standing trial on corruption charges, could use the changes to extricate himself from his legal troubles.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, in Jerusalem on Sunday. Critics fear Mr. Netanyahu could use the judicial changes to extricate himself from his legal troubles.Pool photo by Abir SultanThe attorney general has barred the prime minister from any involvement in the new legislation because of a conflict of interest. Mr. Netanyahu denies any wrongdoing and says he does not have any personal interest in judicial change.After a first reading, bills must go back to a committee for further discussions, then return to the floor for two more votes before passing into law, a process that can take weeks or months. But a deeply split Israel is already in turmoil over the plan, with opponents alarmed at the speed with which it is moving forward, just weeks after the governing coalition — the most right-wing and religiously conservative in Israeli history — came to power.Mass protests have been taking place on Saturday nights in Tel Aviv for seven consecutive weeks and have spread around the country. Last Monday about 100,000 protesters filled the streets around Parliament and the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, according to estimates in the Israeli news media, though organizers put the number at more than double that.On the morning of the vote, small groups of protesters sat down outside the front doors of some coalition lawmakers’ homes in a bid to block them from leaving for the Parliament. They were removed by the police. The coalition leaders have pushed for a hasty first vote on the bills, defying a plea from Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, to pause the legislative process and allow room for a national dialogue and compromise. The president, a mostly ceremonial figure, has little executive power, but his voice is meant to be unifying and carries moral authority.The leader of the opposition, Yair Lapid, a centrist, asked for a 60-day hiatus in the legislative process as a condition for any negotiations. The politicians driving the process have expressed some willingness to talk but have so far refused to halt their work even for a day.“We won’t stop the legislation now, but there is more than enough time until the second and third readings to hold an earnest and real dialogue and to reach understandings,” Yariv Levin, the justice minister, told the Yediot Ahronot newspaper on the eve of the initial vote.Last Monday about 100,000 protesters filled the streets around Parliament and the Supreme Court in Jerusalem.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesBut critics have dismissed the government’s position as disingenuous, arguing that once the bills have passed a first vote, only cosmetic changes will be possible.Many Israelis, including some of those protesting, agree that some kind of judicial change is needed, but opinion polls suggest that a majority want it to be the result of dialogue and do not support the government plan in its current form.The domestic tensions are also causing friction between the Israeli government and its closest ally, the United States. In a rare intervention in Israeli political affairs, President Biden, like Mr. Herzog, has called for efforts to reach a consensus.The American ambassador to Israel, Thomas R. Nides, over the weekend told The Axe Files, a CNN podcast, “We’re telling the prime minister, as I tell my kids, pump the brakes, slow down, try to get a consensus, bring the parties together.”He said he had told Mr. Netanyahu, “We can’t spend time with things we want to work on together if your backyard’s on fire,” referring to the U.S. support that Israel is seeking on issues such as curbing Iran’s nuclear program and Mr. Netanyahu’s ambitions to establish diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia.Amichai Chikli, an Israeli cabinet minister responsible for relations with the Jewish diaspora, responded bluntly to Mr. Nides in an interview with Israel’s public broadcaster, Kan, on Sunday. “I tell the American ambassador, you pump the brakes,” he said, adding: “Mind your own business.” More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Pompeo says Israel has biblical claim to Palestine and is ‘not an occupying nation’

      by

      Pompeo says Israel has biblical claim to Palestine and is ‘not an occupying nation’Trump’s secretary of state makes comments on podcast to defend former administration siding more openly with Israel Mike Pompeo, the former US secretary of state, has defended Israel’s decades-long control of the Palestinian territories by claiming that the Jewish state has a biblical claim to the land and is therefore not occupying it.Pompeo told the One Decision podcast that his religious beliefs, US strategic interests and his view of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, as a “known terrorist” underpinned his support as the Trump administration’s top diplomat for the shift in US policy away from mediating a two-state solution and toward more openly siding with Israel.Democrats’ Ilhan Omar defence weakened by party’s own attacks over IsraelRead more“[Israel] is not an occupying nation. As an evangelical Christian, I am convinced by my reading of the Bible that 3,000 years on now, in spite of the denial of so many, [this land] is the rightful homeland of the Jewish people,” he said.Pompeo, who referred to the occupied West Bank by its Israeli name of Judea and Samaria, declined to support a two-state solution of an independent Palestine alongside Israel – an increasingly diminishing prospect after years of failed negotiations and the rise to power of politicians in Israel who advocate annexing the occupied territories.“I’m for an outcome that guarantees Israeli security and makes the lives better for everyone in the region,” he said.Pompeo, who once suggested that God sent Trump to save Israel, was speaking ahead of publication of a book, Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love, that has fuelled speculation he is laying the groundwork for a presidential run.As secretary of state he reversed a number of longstanding US policies, including overturning legal advice from 1978 that declared Israel’s settlements in the West Bank “inconsistent with international law”. Most western governments, such as the UK, say the settlements and Israel’s annexation of occupied East Jerusalem are a breach of the Geneva conventions and are therefore illegal.Pompeo was Trump’s CIA director before his appointment as secretary of state in 2018. He played an instrumental role in an administration thatrecognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the US embassy to that city from Tel Aviv. The move was widely criticised, including by Washington’s allies, as pre-empting a final agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.Pompeo said it is in the US’s interests to back Israel whatever its policies, and he blamed the Palestinians for the failure of peace negotiations.“What’s in America’s best interest? Is it to sit and wait for Abu Mazen [Abbas], a known terrorist who’s killed lots and lots of people, including Americans … to draw a line on a map? That’s what the state department would do,” he said.“The previous secretary of state ran back and forth from Tel Aviv to Ramallah and tried to draw lines on a map. We said: ‘That’s not in America’s best interest. Let’s go create peace,’ and we did.”Pompeo was part of the Trump administration team that negotiated the Abraham accords normalisation agreements between Israel and several formerly hostile countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and Sudan. At the time he said the accords were part of the administration’s efforts to ensure that “that this Jewish state remains”.“I am confident that the Lord is at work here,” he said.TopicsMike PompeoIsraelRepublicansPalestinian territoriesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats’ Ilhan Omar defence weakened by party’s own attacks over Israel

      by

      Democrats’ Ilhan Omar defence weakened by party’s own attacks over IsraelParty’s criticism of Omar’s Israel position has greased the path for Republicans to oust her from the foreign affairs committee The resolution that set in motion the removal of the only African immigrant, Muslim and former resident of a refugee camp on the congressional committee overseeing US foreign policy paid scant attention to Ilhan Omar’s views on anything but a single issue: Israel.“Omar has attempted to undermine the relationship between the United States and Israel,” said the author of the resolution, Republican congressman Max Miller. “She has disqualified herself from serving on the foreign affairs committee.”The Democratic leadership accused Republicans of a vendetta. Omar said she was targeted as a Muslim immigrant who “needs to be silenced”, and that “when you push power, power pushes back”.But Democratic attempts to defend the Minnesota congresswoman were undercut by the party’s own record of attacking Omar over her statements about Israel almost from the day she was sworn in four years ago, greasing the path for Republicans to vote her off the foreign affairs committee on Thursday.Several Jewish American organisations came out in support of Omar, including Jewish Voice for Peace Action, a group lobbying for a change in US policy on Israel.“These attacks on Representative Omar are about her identity as a Black Muslim progressive woman. But this cannot be removed from the fact that she wants to hold the Israeli government accountable and speak out for Palestinian human rights,” said its political director, Beth Miller.Miller said that while she welcomed the support of the Democratic leadership for Omar in Thursday’s vote, it was hamstrung by its own criticisms of her.“Since she got to office she has been vocally opposed to Israeli occupation and speaking out for Palestinian human rights. And time and time again members of her own party have attacked her for it,” she said.“The actions of the Democratic leadership, and the failure to not just defend her, but sometimes jump on attacks against her, has helped foster an environment that allowed this to happen.”Max Miller’s resolution to remove Omar repeatedly cited Democratic criticisms of her statements on Israel and allegations of antisemitism.“Congresswoman Omar clearly cannot be an objective decision-maker on the foreign affairs committee given her biases against Israel and against the Jewish people,” he said when introducing the resolution.Omar has apologised for the wording of some of her statements while sticking by her points, including criticism of the influence of groups such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and pro-Israel money on US politics.Several liberal Jewish American groups, including J Street, Americans for Peace Now, and the New Israel Fund, said that none of Omar’s policies or statements merited her removal from the committee. They added that accusations against her by the Republican speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, seem “especially exploitative in light of the rampant promotion of antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories by him and his top deputies amid a surge in dangerous right-wing antisemitism”.The groups noted that McCarthy himself had deleted a tweet accusing Jewish billionaires of trying to “buy” an election.But while Republican leaders may not really care about antisemitism, they are serious about defending Israeli governments from criticism. Many Democrats support them in that.Miller said the criticisms of Omar were less about the language she used than trying to silence her.“These attempts to smear and attack her, to police her language, are all part of attempt to silence and threaten anyone who trying to speak out against the Israeli government,” she said.As Omar’s record on the foreign affairs committee shows, she rarely drew public criticism from fellow Democrats even for strident criticisms of US foreign policy in other parts of the world, including accusations that it undermined democracy and helped to fuel terrorism.At a hearing on the erosion of democracy in sub-Saharan Africa in 2020, the Democratic chair at the time, Karen Bass, spoke of the US as “the global champion for democracy”. Omar, on the other hand, asked about the US counter-terrorism training of security forces responsible for massacres in Cameroon and of coup leaders in Mali.“This trend of supporting militarised brutality in the name of counterterrorism is widespread in the continent. I have mentioned Cameroon and Mali, but I could easily mention Somalia, Mozambique, Kenya, or a number of other countries in the continent,” Omar said.At a hearing on US-Africa relations a year earlier, Omar agreed with a witness from the conservative Heritage Foundation that Saudi Arabian promotion of Wahhabism in Africa “has contributed to the rise of jihadist thinking and terrorist recruitment on the continent”.Then Omar asked: “Is it fair to say that our unwavering support for the Saudi government has been counterproductive to our security goals in Africa?”.Omar also used the hearing to challenge claims by the US Africa Command, responsible for American military operations on the continent, that its escalating use of drone strikes in her homeland, Somalia, had not resulted in civilian casualties.None of this brought the attention or orchestrated backlash prompted by her views on Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians.The Republican chair of the foreign affairs committee, Michael McCaul, made plain that his concern lay with Omar positions on this one issue.“It’s just that her worldview of Israel is so diametrically opposed to the committee’s. I don’t mind having differences of opinion, but this goes beyond that,” he said.Some of the most furious and, according to Omar’s supporters, unreasoned criticism came over a single tweet following a foreign affairs committee meeting in June 2021.Omar asked the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, about Washington’s opposition to international criminal court (ICC) investigations in Israel and the occupied Palestine territories, and Afghanistan shortly before it fell to the Taliban.The ICC reached a preliminary conclusion that both Israel and Palestinian armed groups have both committed war crimes that include the unjustified killing of civilians and Israel’s illegal construction of sprawling settlements in the occupied territories. In Afghanistan, the ICC is investigating actions by the Taliban, the former Afghan government’s forces, the US military and the CIA.Omar made it clear in her questions to Blinken that she agreed with the expansive nature of the court’s investigation and that she was not singling out one side in either conflict.“I would emphasise that in Israel and Palestine this includes crimes committed by the Israeli security forces and Hamas. In Afghanistan it includes crimes committed by the Afghan national government and the Taliban,” she told him.“So in both of these cases, if domestic courts can’t or won’t pursue justice – and we oppose the ICC – where do we think the victims of these supposed crimes can go for justice? And what justice mechanisms do you support for them?”The question was typical of the global perspective Omar brought to the foreign affairs committee, shaped by her early life amidst armed conflict in Somalia and in a United Nations refugee camp in Kenya. At its core was Omar’s persistent scrutiny of whether the US lives up to its self-assessment as a force for good in the world when, in this case, it shields itself and its friends from accountability.Blinken made no objection to the framing of the question, and lamented the deaths of Israelis and Palestinians. He said there was no need for ICC investigations because existing national courts in Israel and the US were sufficient to ensure accountability, a claim disputed by human rights organisations that have documented unprosecuted war crimes and crimes against humanity by both countries.The storm broke when Omar tweeted Blinken’s testimony with the comment: “We must have the same level of accountability and justice for all victims of crimes against humanity. We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed by the US, Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban. I asked [Blinken] where people are supposed to go for justice.”Republicans came out of the gate claiming that single tweet was evidence of everything that was wrong with Omar.They said it exposed her hostility to Israel and America, and her antisemitism. They accused her of drawing “moral equivalence” between democratic governments and suicide bombers. Few cared that while Omar’s framing of her tweet may have been impolitic, it was not the congresswoman who linked Israel and Hamas, or the Taliban and the US military, but the ICC in its investigations.Republican Senator Tom Cotton resorted to what is widely regarded as a classic racist taunt to Omar to go back to where she came from: “[She] was a refugee from Somalia and America welcomed her. If she really believes America is a hateful country on par with the Taliban and Hamas, she’s welcome to leave.”It did not take long for Democrats to pile in as well. Fellow party members in Congress issued a statement claiming that Omar’s “false equivalencies give cover to terrorist groups”.The Democrats urged Omar “to clarify her words”. The congresswoman responded by condemning the “constant harassment and silencing” from fellow Democrats.A few Democrats did come to her defence, including Representative Cori Bush.“I’m not surprised when Republicans attack Black women for standing up for human rights. But when it’s Democrats, it’s especially hurtful,” she said.Omar was forced into a retreat after the then Democratic House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, joined the fray to condemn “false equivalencies”, saying they foment prejudice and undermine progress toward peace.Omar issued a statement “clarifying” that she was not making moral comparisons and was “in no way equating terrorist organisations with democratic countries”.But by then, the debate and news coverage had shifted from scrutiny of why the US was protecting Israel and itself, and by extension Hamas and the Taliban, from war crimes investigations to a debate about Omar’s motives.And the Republicans had another arrow in their quiver when the time came to move against her.TopicsDemocratsIsraelIlhan OmarMiddle East and north AfricaPalestinian territoriesUS foreign policySomalianewsReuse this content More