Pages

▼

Wednesday, June 24, 2026

06/23 Links Pt1: The JD Vance foreign-policy test ride is a disaster; UN report a ‘predetermined indictment dressed up as an investigation’; Former hostage condemns UN Special Rapporteur's silence on Hamas' October 7 sexual violence

From Ian:

Jonathan Tobin: The JD Vance foreign-policy test ride is a disaster
Israel is no vassal state. The United States gets enormous benefits from its alliance with this democratic Middle East partner in terms of weapon development and intelligence. As Vance himself stated in 2024, it’s the ideal MAGA ally since, unlike Europe, Israel fights alongside America.

Still, Vance’s willingness to characterize Iran’s possession of weapons to threaten other nations as morally equivalent to Israel’s military was troubling. “You can’t tell a country, whether Israel or Iran, they’re not allowed to have any self-defense,” he said.

And yet, Vance revealed his own bias against Israel when, perhaps channeling the blood libels spread by leftist antisemites like his podcaster friend Tucker Carlson, he warned the Israelis that those who decried an American decision to surrender were simply being bloodthirsty.

“I guess my response to them would be: What is your exact proposal? You’re a country of 9 million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have,” said Vance.

That accusation was as reckless as it was unfair. Israel isn’t trying to kill its way out of anything. It was viciously attacked on Oct. 7, 2023, by Iranian minions who carried out the worst mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. It was the target of direct missile barrages launched on April 14 and Oct. 1, 2024. And it was attacked by missiles, rockets and drones throughout the war that started on Feb. 28, leading to casualties, damage and sending much of the country into bomb shelters day after day.

Had America been similarly attacked, we know very well that Trump and Vance would have exacted a far greater revenge on the assailants than the targeted strikes that Israel executed on Iranian targets.

Being able to vent his contempt and lack of sympathy for an ally that fought side by side with American forces and who were essential to the success America achieved may have given Vance some satisfaction. But it won’t get him out of the fix in which he now finds himself.

A weak negotiator
Simply put, the Iranians know that Vance’s position in the talks is weak. That’s why they are treating him with the same contempt that they once treated Obama’s envoys, as they continually take back any concessions he says he’s wrung out of them, making it clear that if he wants an agreement, then it will have to be on their terms.

We don’t know yet how the negotiations will end. Perhaps Trump’s natural aversion to bad deals and his unwillingness to be a party to a pact that will rightly be characterized as an abject surrender that will not achieve any of America’s war goals will cause him to recall Vance and return to war. He ought to know that as unpopular as the war may be, ending it in defeat will be even more unpopular. Having invested so much political capital in the conflict already, he won’t win it back by mimicking Obama’s appeasement.

Or perhaps he is so sick of the conflict and too panicked by gas prices, plummeting polls and the prospect of a Democratic sweep of the midterms to reverse course again.

Either way, he has set up Vance to fail. Trash-talking Israel may earn him cheers from the antisemitic groyper wing of the GOP, but neither they nor his fellow Israel-bashers at mainstream media outlets like The New York Times will win him the 2028 GOP presidential nomination. And if the vice president is the architect of an end to the war that will be the moral equivalent of President Joe Biden’s retreat from Afghanistan, then it may earn him a place in history, but not one that will be a stepping stone to the Oval Office.
Surrender Is a Verb, Not a Vibe By Abe Greenwald
Via Commentary Newsletter, sign up here.
Because the U.S. had become so unaccustomed to the notion of victory, Israel’s post–October 7 determination to defeat one enemy after another struck many Americans (and others) as something monstrous. Even setting aside the unique standards to which the Jewish state is held, people seemed to think that a country is supposed to end a war once it’s taught the enemy a lesson. Israel, of course, reminded the world that wars are fought to be won, not ended.

So I took Trump’s invoking “unconditional surrender” as a kind of logical next step in reclaiming the purpose of war fighting. When one side surrenders, the other achieves victory. And surrender is also regime change by other means. Once imperial Japan surrendered in 1945, it was no longer imperial Japan. An Islamic Revolutionary Republic that surrenders to the United States would cease to be an Islamic Revolutionary Republic.

Anyway, that was what I had in mind to write about today. But then I saw that White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt just said this about Trump: “When he as commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces determines that Iran no longer poses a threat to the United States of America and the goal of Operation Epic Fury has been fully realized, then Iran will essentially be in a place of unconditional surrender.”

That’s not unconditional surrender. It’s laying out a potential off-ramp for Trump to get out of his demand.

In war, surrender isn’t a “place.” It’s not in the eye of the beholder. And it’s not “essentially” determined. Surrender is an action that someone takes. In Leavitt’s definition, there is no place for the active agent; there is no surrenderer.

Of course, Trump could contradict her before the end of the day. And perhaps Leavitt was just winging it. But as things stand, we’ve taken a step back once again. Back to the murky talk of timelines, exit strategies, and undefined goals.

So perhaps this war, like other recent American wars, will be ended instead of won. And the biggest problem with wars that merely end—no matter how devastated one side may be—is that they don’t end at all.
Bethany Mandel: What Jews hear when JD Vance talks about Israel
The same dynamic appeared recently during a press conference in Switzerland focused on negotiations with Iran. When a reporter referred to what he described as a “genocide in Lebanon,” Vance did not challenge the characterization, nor did he mention Hezbollah’s role in the conflict, and did not note that the organization responsible for years of rocket attacks against Israeli civilians is itself an Iranian proxy. Instead, he moved quickly into a discussion of diplomacy and peace.

Then came perhaps the clearest example. During a White House briefing last week, Vance delivered a remarkably sharp rebuke of Israel, far more aggressive than his statements about Iran, declaring that Trump was effectively the only world leader sympathetic to Israel and suggesting that Israeli officials would be wise not to antagonize the one powerful ally they had left, aggressively asserting that the U.S. has bankrolled Israeli security.

At a moment when Iran remains the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, funds and directs proxy groups across the Middle East, openly calls for the destruction of the U.S. and Israel, and has American blood on its hands, Vance seems more animated by Israeli behavior than by Iranian aggression. His frustration is directed primarily toward Jerusalem, while the regime in Tehran receives far more rhetorical restraint.

That imbalance is why many Jews heard something different in his comments to Stuckey. Had those remarks come from someone whose public rhetoric displayed at least equal skepticism toward Iran, they might have sounded like a reasonable plea for moderation. Coming from someone who has spent recent weeks and months repeatedly criticizing Israel and members of its government, they instead were part of a larger pattern.

We have watched a rapid deterioration take place over the last decade on the Left, where anti-Israel activism has served as a gateway into broader conspiratorial thinking about Jews, power, and influence.

It would be a tragedy to watch the Right make the same mistake after spending years recognizing that pattern on the other side. Conservatives concerned about Jew-hatred metastasizing on the Right may be increasingly hysterical in their rhetoric, but their paranoia is far from unjustified.

The conservative movement has spent years warning about ideological contagions that distorted the Left’s judgment and detached it from reality. It would be an extraordinary act of self-destruction if, having correctly identified the disease, we embrace our own version of it.


Former hostage condemns UN Special Rapporteur's silence on Hamas' October 7 sexual violence
Former Gaza hostage Ilana Gritzewsky took the floor at the UN Human Rights Council on Tuesday in order to confront the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women for her minimization of sexual violence used against victims on October 7, 2023.

"Your report speaks about violence against women. Why is there no mention of Hamas?" Gritzewsky demanded from the Special Rapporteur, Reem Alsalem.

She described her experiences during the October 7 massacre, being beaten by the Hamas terrorists who stormed Kibbutz Nir Oz.

"I woke up half naked with seven terrorists standing over me, not knowing what happened to me in those lost moments," she said. "I went through days of pain and horror in captivity, and even now the feeling of being powerless and violated still lingers. I came back with a broken hip, a broken jaw, and a shattered soul."

Gritzewsky accused Alsalem of choosing "silence and denial" when it comes to the Jewish victims of sexual abuse during and after October 7.

"I am standing here today - not as a report, not as a statistic," Gritzewsky said. "I am a woman who survived. I am the living proof of sexual violence by Hamas. When I and other Israeli women begged not to be raped, why were you silent?"

Gritzewsky had previously visited the UN Security Council in August, 2025 to share her personal story as a former hostage.

During that visit, she recounted that, while she was on the way to Gaza, she lost consciousness when the captors began to touch her and sexually abuse her. She woke up lying naked on rocks surrounded by the Hamas terrorists. To prevent them from assaulting her, she told them she was on her period. They then threw a hijab at her.


UN report accusing Israel of targeting Palestinian kids a ‘predetermined indictment dressed up as an investigation’
A new United Nations report, which accuses the Jewish state of targeting Palestinian children deliberately, is yet another instance of the global body engaging in antisemitism, according to Israeli officials and an independent watchdog that tracks the global body.

“This is not serious fact-finding,” Dina Rovner, legal adviser at U.N. Watch, told JNS of the new report from the U.N. Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry into Israel, which accuses the Jewish state of “genocide.”

“It is a predetermined indictment dressed up as an investigation,” Rovner told JNS. “The commission presents itself as an independent fact-finding body, but even a cursory review of this latest report reveals its bias.”

The panel does not speak for the United Nations, but its findings are likely to be cited before the International Court of Justice, a U.N. judicial body in The Hague, and other international bodies, according to Rovner.

“A report that begins with a conclusion and selectively assembles evidence to support it—that is an embarrassment to the United Nations and a disservice to genuine human rights accountability,” she told JNS.

The report ignores evidence that Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups recruit and use children in combat, which affects the casualty figures which the report cites, according to Rovner.

“While accusing Israel of killing more than 20,000 children in Gaza, citing as its source the Hamas Ministry of Health,” the report “completely ignores the documented fact that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups routinely recruit and use child soldiers: Palestinian boys under the age of 18, some as young as 12 or 13,” she said.

Those terrorist groups have published martyr notices and eulogies identifying minors as members, she said.

The report also accuses Israel of deliberately targeting schools, hospitals, displacement camps and civilian infrastructure without sufficiently accounting for “extensive evidence” that Hamas uses those sites for military purposes, according to Rovner.

“Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom and others,” she told JNS. “Its leaders, including Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh, have openly acknowledged that Hamas benefits from civilian casualties in Gaza. No credible assessment of child casualties in Gaza can ignore these realities.”

The Israeli Foreign Ministry stated that the panel’s report is a “propaganda piece as outrageous as its previous ones.”
UN Watch: UN Watch Legal Rebuttal: Disproving the Pillay Commission’s Charge That Israel Deliberately Targets Palestinian Children
On June 23, 2026, the Pillay Commission submitted to the UN Human Rights Council a 94-page conference room paper titled “The essence of childhood has been destroyed”: Israel’s deliberate targeting of Palestinian children in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 7 October 2023. Pursuant to its founding resolution, A/HRC/RES/S-30/1, this Commission is mandated to produce two reports per year—one to the Human Rights Council and one to the General Assembly. Having already submitted its annual report to the Human Rights Council, the present report was not required under the Commission’s mandate. The Commission nevertheless chose to devote substantial additional resources to producing a report aimed at substantiating allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity against Israel for use in international legal and diplomatic proceedings.

This Conference Room Paper appears to be presented under the Commission’s mandate to “collect, consolidate and analyse evidence” in order to “maximize the possibility of its admissibility in legal proceedings,” such as before the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) or the International Court Justice (“ICJ”). The UN Guidance and Practice for fact-finding missions provides that evidence must be evaluated for its “reliability” and “truthfulness,” that investigations must be conducted with “integrity,” meaning “without any bias,” and that factual findings must be “adequately corroborated” by at least two other “independent and reliable” sources.

Yet, as detailed below, the Commission relies on a one-sided evidentiary record and repeatedly draws conclusions regarding intent, knowledge, and targeting decisions from witness testimony that is often impossible to independently verify. It further builds its findings on layers of inference and assumption that are presented as established fact, despite lacking sufficient evidentiary support. At the same time, it disregards key facts that contradict its conclusions, including evidence that Hamas operated from civilian areas and recruited and used children in hostilities. This selective treatment of the evidence raises serious questions regarding the impartiality and integrity of the investigation.

These shortcomings would be troubling in any fact-finding exercise. They are particularly concerning here because the Commission’s findings are intended to inform international legal proceedings, including before the ICC and the ICJ. Findings of this nature—particularly those purporting to establish intent and criminal responsibility—would ordinarily require rigorous testing and corroboration before being relied upon in judicial proceedings. Yet international courts have an established practice of relying on UN reports as evidence. This report therefore undermines not only the integrity of international fact-finding, but also the application of international law and confidence in the UN system as a whole.

A summary of UN Watch’s detailed legal rebuttal follows.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL LEGAL REBUTTAL (PDF)


Sampling flaws may have inflated Lancet's Gaza mortality survey death toll, researchers argue
The widely cited Gaza Mortality Survey, published in The Lancet Global Health, may be more unreliable than previously assumed, according to new correspondence recently published in the British medical journal.

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

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

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

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

One-quarter of violent deaths claimed by only eight percent of sample
Gaza9, for example, reported on 100 out of 393 (roughly one-quarter) violent deaths, while surveying only 8% of the total sample. Both Gaza9 and Gaza3 also exhibited different demographic structures from the remaining teams, including having lower populations of children and smaller mean household sizes.

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

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


Inside Israel’s intimidating Iron Dome is a nation simply ‘fighting for survival’
By the end of my first 12 hours in Israel, I had already heard missile interceptions overhead, sprinted to a bomb shelter before breakfast then twice soon after, and watched hotel staff discuss incoming rockets with the same composure most people reserve for weather forecasts.

For many Israelis, the gap between how the conflict is perceived abroad and how it is experienced by those living it is, in part, why a large portion reject the idea that their country is an aggressor in this war.

To them, the missiles are more than just a trigger for an alternate alarm clock or a regular inconvenience.

They are a constant reminder of the threat posed to their very existence by those who seek to destroy Israel.

“Nothing is 100 percent,” another Tel Aviv local told me while spruiking Israel’s “lifesaving” Iron Dome and advanced weaponry.

“But without it we’re sitting ducks so thanks God that we have these systems today.

“Hamas and Hezbollah and all of the others like them must be neutralized for the sake of the world.

“Israel is just the only country with the guts to do it but that’s also because we to.”

On Monday, Israel’s prime minister claimed that the joint US-Israeli military campaign against Iran had spared his country from what he described as the Islamic republic’s threat of “nuclear annihilation”.

Ben Azra Haim, an Israeli taxi driver who drove me to the airport at the end of my trip, agreed with that sentiment.

He also credited Israel with preventing hostile states from obtaining nuclear capabilities, citing Israeli operations against Iraqi and Syrian nuclear facilities in previous decades.

“My feeling is, as a Jewish guy, we saved the world three times already,” he said.
JPost Editorial: New US-Iran Lebanon oversight body excludes Israel, gives Tehran say over IDF actions
As additional details emerge from the talks that took place between the US and Iran in Switzerland, they reveal the dire predicament that Israel is getting mired in.

A joint statement released by the mediating countries, Qatar and Pakistan, announced the creation of a deconfliction mechanism for Lebanon. According to reports on N12, it would limit Israeli military action to only responding to “imminent threats,” rather than to the broader category of “emerging threats,” according to a Monday report.

The N12 report noted that the new arrangement would depart from a previous framework, established in November 2024, that included representatives from Israel, Lebanon, the United States, France, and the United Nations. The new oversight body would include the US, Iran, Lebanon, Qatar, and Pakistan - but not Israel.

In essence, it’s creating an absurd reality that gives Iran - the nation bent on destroying Israel and fueling the Hezbollah holy war against the Jewish state - a senior role in determining whether Israel is violating the framework set up to defuse the war in Lebanon.

As such, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, predictably lauded the new mechanism, calling it a “major progress to end the Lebanon War.”

US VP JD Vance announces 'deconfliction mechanism,' says Israel part of talks
US Vice President JD Vance, when announcing the “deconfliction mechanism” in Burgenstock on Sunday, said that Israel would be part of the conversation. But without representation, Jerusalem is once again being shut out from vital decisions being made that affect the well-being of its citizens, a trend that has gained steam since the partnership with the US that launched the February 28 attack against Iran.

Naturally, Israel has lashed out at what’s taking place behind its back. President Isaac Herzog said on Monday that any negotiations to end the Israel-Lebanon conflict should be done by the two countries themselves and not by “Iranian extortion.”

Shortly after the N12 report aired, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a Hebrew-language statement stressing that Israeli troops in southern Lebanon have “full freedom of action” against both “direct or emerging threats” posed to them.

“The directive that the defense minister and I have given the IDF is clear and has not changed: Our forces in southern Lebanon have full freedom of action to thwart any direct or emerging threat against them or against residents of northern Israel. The IDF faces no restrictions in this regard,” Netanyahu said.

That view was reiterated on Tuesday in a joint statement issued by Netanyahu, Defense Minister Israel Katz, and IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir.
Michael Doran: With the Iran MoU, the U.S. Is Buying Time to Prepare for the Future
At first glance, the memorandum of understanding (MoU) looks like a wish list drafted in Tehran. It grants Iran consultations with Oman on regulating traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and even a $300 billion reconstruction fund to help rebuild and modernize Iran. In return, the U.S. receives a vague and completely dishonest commitment not to pursue a nuclear weapon.

However, let's rewind to Feb. 4, 2025, when Trump announced that the U.S. intended to turn Gaza into "the Riviera of the Middle East." 16 months later, no developer has broken ground on a beachfront resort in Gaza City. 16 months from now, there will be no $300 billion pouring into Iran. No consortium of international investors will ever commit that much money to Iran's jihadist regime.

The MoU's primary goals are to halt the fighting and to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Convincing the Iranians to reopen the strait required concessions. With midterm elections looming, the political math was unforgiving. Trump calculated that retreat, however inelegant, was preferable.

His critics see this move as surrender, offering Iran a pathway to rebuild its nuclear program, proxy network, and ballistic missile arsenal, while demanding nothing in return. This analysis is overwrought. First of all, Trump revitalized the credibility of the American military threat.

During his second term, Trump has ordered three major military operations against Iran: against the Houthis, and against Iranian nuclear and military sites. Each time, the operation ended abruptly. But the cumulative effect has degraded Iranian power severely and quickly. Trump's tactical retreat is real, but so are the war's achievements.

The president's critics want us to believe that the MoU marks a definitive and permanent surrender, leaving Iran free to behave as it pleases. A more sober assessment would conclude that Trump is buying time. If Iran seeks to revitalize its nuclear program and protect it with a shield of ballistic missiles, Trump's record suggests that he will strike again.

One area where Trump paid a higher price than necessary is Lebanon and the linking of reopening the Strait of Hormuz to Israeli operations against Hizbullah. By accepting that linkage, Trump restored a source of Iranian leverage that battlefield successes had largely eliminated. No Israeli government can absorb Hizbullah attacks while refraining from military action.


Israel and the U.S. Agree: No IDF Withdrawal from Southern Lebanon for Now
The dialogue between Israel and the U.S. on Lebanon has produced understandings that an Israeli withdrawal is not currently on the table.

Forces on the ground will be limited to removing various threats and completing the clearing of terrorist infrastructure in the area south of the yellow line that Israel drew in southern Lebanon.

It was agreed that there would be closer coordination between the IDF and U.S. Central Command.

This will not only mean notifying the Americans before significant Israeli action, but also providing continuous updates, both on Hizbullah violations and on IDF activity.

Major Israeli offensive operations, such as a strike in the Beqaa Valley, will require high-level Israeli diplomatic approval.

Iran is facing an American demand to explain why Hizbullah is attacking, after Israel and other intelligence organizations, including Arab ones, passed along information indicating that the orders to Hizbullah to escalate the war are coming directly from Tehran.


Iran: ‘No plans’ to allow IAEA officials to inspect nuclear sites
The vice president described Tehran’s alleged decision to allow inspections as a significant milestone toward addressing concerns about its nuclear program, and “what we’re most excited about, as Americans.

“We laid a very good foundation for a successful final deal,” Vance said. “The final deal is the house. We set the foundation. We haven’t built the house, but we’ve laid a successful foundation to get to a good place for the American people.”

Following the supposed progress in the negotiations, the Trump administration on Monday authorized the regime to produce, deliver and sell “crude oil, petrochemical products and petroleum products of Iranian-origin through Aug. 21.”

“In line with ongoing productive talks in Switzerland, Iran has committed to free and open transit in the Strait of Hormuz and to permit International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors into the country,” wrote Scott Bessent, the U.S. Treasury secretary.

“Treasury has issued a temporary 60-day general license authorizing the production, delivery and sale of Iranian oil,” he stated.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf vowed on Monday that conditions in the Strait of Hormuz “will never go back to the way they were before the war.”

“Of course, international regulations will be observed, but Iran will administer the Strait of Hormuz,” Ghalibaf, who leads Tehran’s negotiating team, told Iranian media as he returned from talks with U.S. representatives in Switzerland.

Under the June 17 Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S., Iran agreed to restore commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran pledged to facilitate the safe passage of commercial vessels, remove “technical and military obstacles,” including mines, and restore normal shipping within 30 days, while Washington agreed to begin lifting its naval blockade immediately.

The document also calls for discussions among Iran, Oman and other Gulf littoral states regarding the future administration of the Strait.
Trump told Netanyahu ‘all the Jews are sick of you,’ days before Gaza deal, new book reveals
President Donald Trump grew so frustrated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during last September’s negotiations over a U.S.-brokered deal to end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, that Trump cursed and yelled at Netanyahu in a phone call days before the agreement was announced publicly, according to a new book.

“Everybody’s sick of you, Bibi,” Trump said in a phone call with Netanyahu, Jared Kushner and White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, according to a book published on Tuesday by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan chronicling the first year of Trump’s second term. “All the Jews are sick of you. Even the two Jews on this call are sick of you.”

The conversation came during the United Nations General Assembly last September, when Trump was selling the deal that became his 20-point plan to end the Gaza war that began after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks. In the book, titled Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump, Haberman and Swan recount the turbulent couple of weeks that led to the deal — starting with Kushner’s searing anger at the Israeli government after the Israel Defense Forces conducted an airstrike that targeted Hamas leadership in Doha. The September 9 attack came one day after Kushner and Witkoff met in Witkoff’s Miami home with Ron Dermer, a top advisor to Netanyahu, to discuss day-after plans for Gaza.

“Dermer lied to us,” Kushner and Witkoff told officials at the White House after the strikes in Qatar.

The Qataris, according to Haberman and Swan, initially reacted by deciding they no longer wanted to help Israel. Kushner felt the same.

“I’m f**king out. The Israelis are crazy,” Kushner reportedly told an associate at the time. Then he realized it could provide an opening to rein in Netanyahu after nearly two years of war.
Israeli Ambassador Leiter expresses concern over Iran, U.S. deconfliction mechanism
Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter criticized the Trump administration on Tuesday for agreeing to establish a “deconfliction cell” to end military operations in Lebanon without Israel’s involvement as part of the ongoing peace talks with Iran, the first public statement from Jerusalem denouncing the move.

Leiter released a pair of statements in English and Hebrew at the start of the fifth round of multi-day diplomatic talks at the U.S. State Department between Israel and Lebanon, in which he warned that both parties were “heading towards a train wreck.”

The ambassador said that while the Israelis “support President Trump’s vision of ensuring that Iran no longer has nuclear capabilities, ballistic missiles or the ability to funnel money to its proxies to threaten its neighbors and maintain its regional hegemony,” he worried “that the concept of ‘deconfliction’ is misplaced.”

“Israel is not in conflict with Lebanon. Therefore, deconfliction is not the issue. All that is needed is coordination with Lebanon. The only issue is Hezbollah,” Leiter said.

In his Hebrew statement, he added that “the basic premise” of the talks out the outset “was that Iran was not involved, and the main discussion is about Lebanon and Hezbollah — not about the extent to which Iran can restrain Hezbollah. That is not Iran’s role. Its role is to get out of Lebanon.”

He went on to pose a series of questions, without specifically directing them toward the Trump administration or his Lebanese counterparts, about the aim of Israeli-Lebanese peace talks. “We agreed to a ceasefire that was conditional on Hezbollah withdrawing north. Is this agreement still binding?” he asked, referencing the parties’ agreement reached at the end of the last round of talks earlier this month. “We cannot afford commitments that fade away. And it is important to be clear: Israel will act against immediate and evolving threats to its citizens and soldiers.”
Senate Republicans take issue with administration’s effort to curb Israeli operations against Hezbollah
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said that Israel’s right to self defense must be protected in U.S. talks with Iran, after administration officials publicly urged Israel to cease operations against Hezbollah as part of the recent memorandum of understanding — even though Israel, Hezbollah and Lebanon are not parties to that agreement.

Hezbollah has continued to attack Israel, killing Israeli soldiers last week.

“I just want to make sure that Israel is able to defend itself, and I think whatever happens as a result of these talks, that is something that needs to be maintained,” Thune said. “Hopefully the U.S.-Israeli relationship will remain such that we fully understand their need to be able to defend themselves, and right now on their northern border, they’re being attacked daily.”

Asked if he had received any word from the White House on when the administration plans to brief members of Congress, or even senior congressional leadership, on the MOU, Thune replied: “I haven’t. My assumption is because, again, all the briefers are over there [in Switzerland], but hopefully soon. We’ve asked for it, and hopefully we’ll get it.”

Senate lawmakers, including Thune, also expressed some reservations about the waiver lifting U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil sales, which was issued on Monday without any specific nuclear concessions by Iran.


IDF strikes Hezbollah terror cell in Southern Lebanon
The Israel Defense Forces on Tuesday struck a Hezbollah terrorist cell posing an “immediate threat” to troops in the in Southern Lebanon security zone, the military said.

Tuesday’s announcement was the first reported airstrike in Lebanon since Jerusalem and the Iranian-backed terrorist group agreed to renew a U.S.-brokered truce after a deadly flare-up over the weekend.

“The IDF identified a cell of armed terrorists operating in close proximity to IDF soldiers in the security zone in the area of the Ali al-Taher Ridge,” according to the military statement.

“Following the identification, the soldiers struck the terrorists north of the Security Zone in order to remove the threat,” added the army. “The IDF will continue to operate to remove immediate threats and will not allow the Hezbollah terrorist organization to harm Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers.”

Hezbollah in a statement accused Israel of breaching the truce understandings with Beirut by striking the cell.

“We warn that what the enemy has undertaken constitutes a blatant violation of the ceasefire,” Hezbollah said in a statement cited by Al-Akhbar, which is affiliated with the terrorist group.


The Ceasefire Now Pressed upon Israel in Lebanon Amounts to the Reconstitution of Hizbullah
A ceasefire that does not deal with Hizbullah does not halt the next war; it lets Iran rebuild the tool meant to wage it. In the West, war is meant to produce a diplomatic achievement; the agreement is the endpoint. For Iran, one can lose militarily and still win at the table; an agreement is time to regroup for the next war. Just as Iran will use any pause to rebuild its military and nuclear infrastructure, so, too, the ceasefire now pressed upon Israel in Lebanon amounts to the reconstitution of Hizbullah for the coming campaign.

In recent months, the Lebanese government began a difficult move against Hizbullah's weapons. The U.S.-Iran agreement endangers this momentum. Hizbullah will rebuild its power on the claim that its Iranian patron is still standing, still reaching an agreement with the U.S., still forcing Lebanon back into the regional equation in a way that shields Hizbullah. This is an Iranian victory on Lebanese soil.

The territory Hizbullah lost to Israel must pass to the Lebanese army, not return to Hizbullah. Israel will no longer allow Hizbullah to entrench on its border.


FDD: The U.S. and Iran's diplomatic dance | feat. Eli Lake and Janatan Sayeh

Senate approves House-passed Iran war powers resolution in largely symbolic move
The Senate voted on Tuesday to pass a House-passed war powers resolution directing the administration to withdraw U.S. forces from Iran — a congressional rebuke of the administration over the war in Iran — though legally its effects are likely to be largely symbolic.

The resolution passed by a 50-48 vote, with Republican Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Susan Collins (R-ME) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) again voting in favor and Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) voting against it. Ultimately, GOP absences enabled the resolution to go forward.

But the resolution, now passed by both chambers, came in the form of a concurrent resolution, which is not submitted to the president and, based on past court precedent, is not seen as carrying the force of law — though a House Democratic aide argued to CNN that the measure would be binding.

Unlike previous efforts, however, the concurrent resolution did not require other procedural votes by the Senate, allowing Democrats to take advantage of the Republican absences and move directly toward final passage to deliver a message of rebuke to the administration.
Tony Blinken praises Ro Khanna’s view of the Iran war
Former Secretary of State Tony Blinken offered support for Rep. Ro Khanna’s (D-CA) stance on the Iran war and the U.S. deal with Iran in a post on X on Tuesday.

Blinken praised the “wise words from my friend [Khanna],” reposting a Fox News op-ed by the congressman making the case that “stopping the Iran war is good. But Trump’s deal is worse than the JCPOA.”

He’s the second prominent former Biden administration official to draw closer to Khanna in leading up to the 2028 presidential primary, joining former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain, who has reportedly been advising Khanna behind the scenes as he prepares for a presidential run.

The comments also come as some progressive presidential contenders call for the Democratic Party to purge its ranks of foreign policy advisers who served in the Biden administration, given its general support for Israel.

Khanna, in the op-ed published on Fox News’ website, praised the “welcome news” of the end of the war in Iran, but called the war “a self-inflicted disaster that cost American lives and burned through taxpayer dollars” and said the deal reached is more favorable for Iran than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action from which President Donald Trump withdrew.

“The details of the ceasefire released this week show that Vice President [JD] Vance woefully misled Americans on at least five accounts when he claimed the administration’s deal was better than the JCPOA that President Obama negotiated in 2015,” Khanna continued. “A better deal for ending this war would have been anchored in tough diplomacy and economic pressure rather than blunt force.”





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    

 

 

at