Amb. Danny Danon: Do Not Mistake Israeli Democracy for Weakness
The turnout in the Israeli Knesset election on Oct. 27 was 77.7% of eligible voters, the highest in Israel's history.After the U.S. Midterm Elections
Most importantly, the election results should daunt our enemies. Since Oct. 7, Israel has fought valiantly against the threats that surround us: Hamas in Gaza, Hizbullah in Lebanon, and the Iranian regime itself.
All the major Israeli parties share the same philosophy: that Israel must address these threats and ensure they can never attack Israel again.
Israeli citizens have proven that in a region of extremism, our democracy remains a beacon of hope to the rest of the world, and that we will fight to protect it.
Eight months after devastating joint U.S.-Israeli strikes, Iran is rebuilding its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
An IRGC spokesperson this month threatened to turn Israel into "scorched earth," and displace our residents to the Sinai Desert. So long as Iran can deliver on these threats, we take them seriously.
Hizbullah itself admitted that it is preparing for confrontation with Israel. Iranian weapons and funds continue to arm radical extremists that seek Israel's destruction.
In the first election since Oct. 7, Israelis demonstrated that a secure and prosperous Middle East remains a top priority, and that we will defend our country from those who threaten to destroy it.
Our message to the Iranian regime is clear. We will not stand by as Iran doubles down on its radical agenda. We will protect our people.
Years ago, a Palestinian journalist argued to me that without America, Israel would have lost every war. I reminded him of the War of Independence and the Six-Day War, in which we won almost entirely on our own. It would be harder, I told him, but we would win every military campaign.Ending U.S. Military Aid to Israel
After the U.S. midterm elections, one pro-Israel stronghold remains, the White House, and it too will probably fall in the next election or the one after. Quite a few pro-Israel senators and House members remain. But what was once the lunatic fringe of Congress has become the mainstream.
The cause was a years-long, dollar-rich campaign, antisemitic in essence. It held that Israel is to blame for nearly every trouble Americans have, has no right to exist, and is a state of European colonialists that stole the land of the poor Palestinians.
President Trump's hasty declaration on Election Day about a full halt of aid to Israel only seemed to prove the claim that American aid does come at the expense of budgets meant for the American citizen. And try explaining to them that the $3.8 billion a year brought several times that amount into America every year, in jobs, arms sales, and joint developments.
Congress is expected to complicate the war effort in Iran. It will not truly be able to halt the moves, at least not for several months, but it will try, despite the complete contradiction to American interests and to those of every U.S.-friendly state in the region.
A new era is beginning. Israel will have to reach independent military capabilities sooner than expected and, at the same time, reposition itself diplomatically against a hostile Europe and a confused America.
On Tuesday, President Trump announced that the U.S. would stop providing nearly $4 billion in annual military aid to Israel by the end of 2026. President Trump just did Israel an enormous favor with an important step toward completing the promise of Israeli independence. For nearly 80 years, the Jewish state has been building toward a moment when it could finally say something that Jews, for most of their history, were rarely in a position to say to anyone: Thank you. We can take care of ourselves.
The foreign military financing is overwhelmingly directed toward purchasing American-made military equipment. It supports American manufacturers, American workers, American military production, and American technological capabilities. Yet, Israel finds itself portrayed as a helpless foreign dependent draining the American treasury. That perception is not only misleading. It has become strategically and politically damaging.
Israelis should be asking: What exactly are we sacrificing in exchange for that money? A country that has developed some of the most sophisticated military technology on Earth has been operating under a system that increasingly directs its military purchasing power toward foreign manufacturers rather than its own. Military assistance gives Washington considerable leverage over Israeli decision-making that may involve a delayed shipment, a threatened restriction, or a disagreement over how Israel conducts a military operation.
There is an enormous difference between listening to a friend and being dependent on that friend's approval. A country responsible for the survival of its own people cannot afford to confuse the two. The lesson of Jewish history is that a people who cannot ultimately provide for their own security are always vulnerable to the decisions of others.
Ending military aid should not be confused with abandoning the American-Israeli alliance. The U.S. has compelling reasons to maintain that alliance. Israel provides intelligence, technological innovation, military expertise, and a capable regional partner in one of the most strategically important parts of the world. Replacing military assistance with a more conventional commercial and strategic partnership could make the relationship healthier.
America has been an extraordinary friend to Israel, and American military support has contributed meaningfully to Israel's security. Gratitude, however, is not the same as permanent dependence. The greatest compliment Israel can pay the U.S. is to demonstrate that decades of partnership helped create a country strong enough to stand increasingly on its own.
Khaled Abu Toameh: No More 'Deals': President Trump Needs to Finish Two Jobs. If He Does, He Will Go Down in History as the Greatest President Ever
There is a difference between agreeing to a document and actually implementing it.Will Congress Constrain Trump on Iran?
For Iran, Hamas is not simply another Palestinian political movement. It is part of the network of armed groups that the Iranian regime has cultivated to threaten Israel and advance its regional objectives, which include exporting the Islamic Revolution to the entire Middle East and beyond.
Given Qatar's and Turkey's long record of hosting Hamas leaders and providing the terrorist organization with political and financial support, there is little reason to expect either country to put genuine pressure on Hamas to dismantle its military and political infrastructure.
The United States needs to reassess its policy toward Gaza and Iran. Peace arrangements that leave Hamas and Iran armed, organized and capable of rebuilding their military infrastructures is not a lasting peace arrangement. It is a temporary pause that allows both Hamas and Iran to prepare for more massacres against Israel and everyone else.
Israel cannot be expected to accept the permanent presence of armed terrorist organizations, such as Hamas or its patron, Iran, committed to its destruction just because international diplomats prefer to believe that another "deal" will somehow solve the problem.
There can be no more fake "Munich, the Sequel" "deals" that only one side, the US, has any intention of keeping. Trump urgently needs to finish these two jobs. If he does, he will go down in history as the greatest president ever. The first is to ensure that the Gaza Strip -- for both the people there and the entire region -- is neutralized from terror forever. The second, as he originally promised, is to liberate the Iranian people -- and again, the entire region -- from a catastrophic regime.
With his sweeping deregulatory framework and foundational tax policy firmly established, the heavy lifting of traditional GOP policy is already in the rearview mirror. What remains for his second term is not a high-stakes legislative wish list, but the aggressive exercise of executive authority and high-visibility cultural battles – none of which require a single vote from Congress.Israel, Greece, Cyprus slam Turkey-Libya sea deal
In the American ethos, governing with unified control is often a poison pill. Although not explicitly articulated by the Founding Fathers, their system of checks and balances effectively guarantees that a president will preside over a contrarian Congress for at least two years of his term.
During the Clinton years, this was clearly evident: While the 42nd president enjoyed consistent high approval ratings, voters made it clear to draw a line in the sand for six years out of eight years in office, giving him a Republican Congress that ultimately forced him to produce welfare reform, a balanced budget, and overall tweaks that made him the darling of middle America (like a focus on education, school uniform, and family values). All this remade him as a Reagan Democrat and reassembled his coalition of voters of hard-core Democrats, moderate "third-way" independents, and disillusioned Republicans just in time for November 1996. In fact, Clinton probably thanks Newt Gingrich every morning for the 1994 Republican Revolution in which the GOP swept Congress, as this was the first step toward his re-election. Ultimately, this was the harbinger of his legacy of "Peace and Prosperity" that he wanted Al Gore to run on in 2000 (only to realize that his vice president was more concerned over distancing himself from his boss because of Monica-gate).
Practically speaking, when the White House and Congress are gridlocked, its a boon for the executive because it puts the onus on 535 legislators rather than on one single unitary office-holder on 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Trump, who has become obsessed with securing his legacy through new physical monuments in Washington and other grand projects, could not care if he passes more bills from now until January 20, 2029. Anything he doesn't like he will simply veto. If a Supreme Court vacancy comes up, he will likely try to strike a one-off deal with lawmakers to fill it, but worst-case, he will ride it out for the rest of his term and rely on the conservative tilt in the Supreme Court.
By losing the legislative branch, the White House is instantly liberated to rule by executive mandate while pointing directly at Capitol Hill to explain away domestic friction.
Senior defense officials from Israel, Greece and Cyprus met in Athens on Thursday and agreed to set up a joint working group for their defense industries, while declaring a recently ratified maritime agreement between Turkey and Libya legally void, the Israeli Defense Ministry said.Jordan Wants Israel's Help, but at What Price?
The trilateral meeting brought together the heads of defense policy from the three ministries, along with other senior officials, and focused on expanding military cooperation and on shared security challenges in the Eastern Mediterranean, according to a joint statement released by the ministry’s spokesperson.
The three countries called defense cooperation a central pillar of their partnership, building on the joint declaration adopted when their leaders met in Jerusalem on December 22, 2025. They also reiterated the leaders’ invitation for other like-minded countries to join the framework.
The talks covered regional security assessments, defense-industrial cooperation and innovation, maritime security, including the protection of sea lanes and critical infrastructure, and disaster preparedness and civil protection.
The officials agreed to establish a trilateral defense-industrial working group to foster partnerships among their defense industries, explore joint development and production, and improve interoperability between their militaries, the statement said.
Israel is expected to serve simultaneously as the Jordanian Kingdom's insurance company, its water supplier, and its punching bag. When dependence on cooperation with us exists alongside rhetoric portraying us as a regional threat, Israel is entitled to ask questions.Eisenkot bolstered by PM recommendations, but still well short of a government
In 1958, Israel allowed British aircraft carrying troops to Jordan to pass through its airspace as part of efforts to help protect King Hussein's regime. In September 1970, Israeli deterrent moves and intelligence shared with the Jordanians helped confront a Syrian invasion. In addition, there have been a number of unpublicized incidents in which Israeli intelligence prevented attempts to assassinate the king.
Israel continues to supply Jordan with 50 million cubic meters of water annually under the peace arrangements. In 2021, an agreement was added for the sale of another 50 million cubic meters, doubling the total. The additional arrangement expired at the end of 2025 and was not renewed. Haifa and Ashdod ports serve as gateways for cargo moving to and from Jordan, with the Jordan River crossing handling 140 trucks a day.
Israel should adopt the transactional model: something in return for something. Israel should honor the peace treaty and preserve security cooperation that also serves its own interests. But expanded water supplies, new benefits, and additional trade facilitation should become part of negotiations centered on proper diplomatic relations, combating incitement, and preventing smuggling along the shared border. A cold peace does not entitle anyone to unlimited credit.
It’s hard to think how things could have gone worse on Thursday for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or better for his chief challenger, Yashar leader Gadi Eisenkot.Liberman drops veto on haredi parties in coalition, opposition in talks with UTJ - report
Well before Likud, Yashar, or even B’Yachad joined party after party striding into President Isaac Herzog’s office to discuss who he should nominate to form a government, it was clear that he would be handing the torch to Eisenkot.
With 67 MKs recommending that Herzog give him first crack at building a coalition, Eisenkot now has momentum on his side and little impetus to focus on power sharing. But with the number of those lawmakers actually willing to work together far shy of a majority, Thursday’s developments did little to change the math putting the country on a trajectory toward a stalemate, and it is unclear if Eisenkot will be able to change the equation.
The clincher for Eisenkot to get the mandate seemed to come in the mid-afternoon, when the Joint List made a surprise announcement that it would ask Herzog to nominate the Yashar leader, after previously indicating that it could abstain.
But in reality, the die was largely cast much earlier, when United Torah Judaism became the election’s lone free agent, refusing to recommend Netanyahu to Herzog and signaling that it might be willing to switch teams for the right price.
Before the premier’s very bad day, analysts had predicted that he would have 53 seats worth of recommendations, just a few shy of Eisenkot’s predicted 56. Members of the Likud party meet with President Isaac Herzog at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem during consultations with political parties, November 5, 2026. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)
Those numbers would have likely still resulted in Eisenkot getting the nod, but psychologically they would have only bolstered the feeling that the camps were tightly deadlocked and headed toward a new round of elections.
In that scenario, the president may have been more hesitant about nominating Eisenkot and would likely have at least used the occasion to prod him toward a unity deal that would include sharing power with Netanyahu and his 27-seat Likud faction rather than returning Israelis to the ballot box.
Instead, the moves by UTJ and the Joint List resulted in Eisenkot whomping Netanyahu 67 to 46 Knesset seats on recommendations, bolstering the former general and his allies and giving them what they see as a mandate to pursue full-on regime change, with Netanyahu booted back to the opposition benches.
Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Liberman has dropped his veto on forming a government with haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties, opening the door for the opposition bloc to begin discussions with United Torah Judaism (UTJ), N12's Amit Segal reported on Thursday
The bloc is reportedly discussing the possibility of drafting a more lenient military conscription law, and the current assumption is that Shas would be forced to support the move as well, under pressure from Rabbi Lando.
UTJ, a longtime coalition partner of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, declined to recommend a candidate for prime minister to President Isaac Herzog during the party's consultation earlier on Thursday.
UTJ's decision to abstain came amid reported tensions between the haredi party and Netanyahu, and it benefits the opposition bloc seeking to replace him. Opposition party leaders have recently signaled greater openness to including haredi parties in their coalition.
A potential coalition led by Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot and including United Torah Judaism (UTJ) would hold 55 seats in the Knesset, falling short of the 61-seat majority needed to form a government. However, it would reduce Netanyahu's bloc to just 46 seats, potentially allowing Eisenkot to form a minority government with Ra'am and the Joint List abstaining.
🚨 ISRAEL ELECTION UPDATE: WHO WILL BREAK THEIR CAMPAIGN PROMISES? President Isaac Herzog has concluded consultations with Israel's political parties. Gadi Eisenkot received 67 recommendations, compared with 46 for Benjamin Netanyahu. But there is a major obstacle: During the election campaign, opposition leaders made commitments about who they would—and would not—govern with. Here is what they told voters: 🇮🇱 GADI EISENKOT — YASHAR ❌ Netanyahu: “I will not sit under Netanyahu, not even in a rotation.” ❌ Arab parties: Rejected including Ra'am in his government. ⚠️ Ultra-Orthodox parties: Campaigned against Haredi military-service exemptions but did not categorically exclude negotiations with Shas or United Torah Judaism. 🇮🇱 NAFTALI BENNETT & YAIR LAPID — B'YACHAD ❌ Netanyahu: Rejected serving under Netanyahu. ❌ Arab parties: Committed to a government relying exclusively on Zionist parties. ❌ Ultra-Orthodox parties: Bennett's campaign pledge also excluded reliance on Haredi parties. 🇮🇱 AVIGDOR LIBERMAN — YISRAEL BEYTENU ❌ Netanyahu: Refused to serve with him under any circumstances. ❌ Arab parties: Rejected both coalition membership and outside parliamentary support. ❌ Ultra-Orthodox parties: Declared during the campaign: “Without Ra'am, without the Joint List, without Shas and without United Torah Judaism.” However, since the election, Liberman has indicated he could cooperate with Haredi parties if they accept his principles, including military conscription. 🇮🇱 YAIR GOLAN — THE DEMOCRATS ❌ Netanyahu: Rejected Netanyahu and Likud. ✅ Arab parties: Openly supports cooperation with Arab parties, including Ra'am. ⚠️ Ultra-Orthodox parties: Opposed Haredi draft exemptions, but did not make a blanket refusal to sit with every Haredi party. NOW CONSIDER THE NUMBERS. The Jewish-led opposition parties secured only 48 seats, well short of the 61 required for a parliamentary majority. Eisenkot reached 67 recommendations through the support of Arab parties that several opposition leaders explicitly rejected as coalition partners. Meanwhile, negotiations with ultra-Orthodox parties—another group targeted by campaign red lines—have not been ruled out. And a unity government with Netanyahu would contradict the opposition leaders' central election commitment. Herzog intends to assign the mandate to form a government on Sunday. The question is no longer simply who received the most recommendations. It is whether Israel's political leaders can assemble a parliamentary majority while keeping the commitments they made to voters. Which campaign promises will survive coalition negotiations?
— Mossadil Commentary (@MOSSADil) November 5, 2026
Ra’am chief Abbas declines to call Hamas a terror group, cites fear for his family’s safety
MK Mansour Abbas, head of the traditionalist Arab party Ra’am, declined to call Hamas a terror group during consultations with President Isaac Herzog on Thursday, citing a desire to remain a “bridge” to Palestinians as well as potential danger to himself and his family.
The exchange came on the second day of Herzog’s post-election meetings with party leaders to hear recommendations on whom the president should task with forming a government. Abbas recommended Yashar party chief Gadi Eisenkot, who has made recognition of Hamas as a terror group a condition for parties seeking to join a government led by him.
During the meeting with Abbas, Herzog asked the Ra’am party chief whether he considers Hamas a terrorist organization.
Abbas noted his movement’s long-running opposition to political violence, and said it is “impossible to constantly put us to this loyalty test.”
He also reiterated his support for US President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan. Abbas said his “vision” is a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with “Hamas and all the military or armed organizations” disarmed.
Eyal Shviki, director general of the President’s Residence, asked Abbas during the meeting why the Ra’am party head doesn’t “answer the skeptics” by simply calling Hamas a terrorist organization.
Abbas answered: “I have an unequivocal answer, but leave me this space to be a bridge. To also influence the other side.”
“We are a bridge. Let’s not destroy that bridge. Don’t turn us into terror supporters or traitors,” he said.
“Leave me also a space to protect myself and my family,” Abbas said, describing the issue as “a matter of life or death.”
The President: How would you act during a major military conflict? Chairman of the Joint List: We weren’t elected to bring down Netanyahu only to bring him back to power. (Amit Segal) https://t.co/7RYhZf4gSg
— Mossadil Commentary (@MOSSADil) November 5, 2026
The Brink: Netanyahu, Trump And The Threat Of Another War With Iran - Amos Harel
In this episode of The Brink, Andrew and Jake are joined in Tel Aviv by veteran Israeli defence correspondent Amos Harel to examine Israel's uncertain political future, the looming threat of another war with Iran and the failures that led to October 7.
Amos explores whether Benjamin Netanyahu could use renewed conflict with Iran to strengthen his political position, the challenges facing his rival Gadi Eisenkot and why Israel remains deeply divided after an inconclusive election.
Drawing on his extensive reporting and upcoming book Anatomy of Failure, Amos reveals how Israeli intelligence repeatedly underestimated Hamas despite obtaining detailed plans for the October 7 attacks, and why he believes a national inquiry is essential.
The conversation also examines rising settler violence in the West Bank, the influence of Israel's far right and whether the next government can restore accountability and repair Israel's international standing.
Chapters
00:00 Israel’s Future: Netanyahu, Iran & The Battle For Power
02:47 Is Netanyahu Pushing Trump Towards Another War With Iran?
07:16 Could War Save Netanyahu’s Political Career?
09:18 Netanyahu, The Far Right & Israel’s Political Crisis
16:26 Who Is Gadi Eisenkot, The Man Challenging Netanyahu?
22:11 Why Is Netanyahu So Hated In Israel?
30:44 October 7th: How Israeli Intelligence Failed
35:57 How Hamas Planned & Executed October 7th
39:42 Settler Violence & The Reality Of The West Bank
46:25 Ethnic Cleansing, Sanctions & Israel’s International Reputation
Harvard did not expect this confrontation
UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer won a contentious debate at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, according to an assessment by Grok and the widespread consensus from a global audience of 100,000 who viewed the debate online on YouTube and other social media.Palestinians seek series of resolutions critical of Israel at UN General Assembly
Neuer went up against two Harvard University academics - his official counterpart as well as the moderator - over the UN's double standards against Israel.
“Hillel Neuer won the debate," Grok concluded, citing his “detailed, specific evidence of institutional double standards," including the UN Human Rights Council's unique agenda item targeting Israel, its disproportionate condemnations of the Jewish state, biased UN investigators, and Hamas ties to UNRWA."
Harvard professor Kathryn Sikkink “did not rebut the numbers or examples with comparable data," instead relying on general arguments about the UN's political nature.
The debate, hosted by Harvard's Carr-Ryan Center for Human Rights Policy, was intended to pit Neuer against Sikkink, a scholar of international human rights.
But the discussion became two-against-one as Harvard moderator Patrick Vinck repeatedly intervened to challenge Neuer's arguments, culminating in a heated exchange over UNRWA - in which the Harvard professor struggled to substantiate his claims.
Harvard Moderator’s UNRWA Defense Collapses Under Questioning
The most dramatic confrontation came when Vinck defended UNRWA despite Neuer's evidence that senior Hamas officials had held leadership positions within its workforce.
“As an institution, it is not biased," Vinck insisted. “The investigation has cleared UNRWA."
“Which investigation?" Neuer immediately demanded.
Vinck acknowledged that he was “not an expert on this," before claiming that implicated individuals had been dismissed.
“Who was fired?" Neuer pressed.
Neuer then cited the case of Fathi Sharif, who headed UNRWA's teachers' union in Lebanon while simultaneously serving as Hamas's commander in the country.
Neuer pointed to a recent UNRWA dispute tribunal ruling requiring the agency to pay death benefits to Sharif's family, precisely because he had never been dismissed during his lifetime with UNRWA.
“UNRWA never fired him. He was never fired," Neuer declared.
Vinck declined to pursue the factual dispute, saying he did not want to “engage in litigation of all the numbers and facts."
The Palestinian delegation to the United Nations was reportedly working with European delegations to draft resolutions seeking to secure assistance for Palestinians, including UN commitments to protect property and sources of income in the West Bank, and condemnations of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Ynet reported Friday.World Court gets 5 new judges; 1 accused Israel of ‘ethnic cleansing’ weeks after Oct. 7
The drafts were also expected to include an official condemnation of Israel's plans to advance construction in the E1 area, as well as a demand for the UN to formally declare that it did not recognize Israel's presence in the West Bank.
Additionally, the proposed measures called for a policy of differentiation between the West Bank and the rest of Israel, Ynet reported, noting that the drafts were still being negotiated between the Palestinian delegation and European Union member states.
Danny Danon describes efforts as 'diplomatic attack'
Despite lobbying efforts by the Palestinians, the EU's 27 member states had failed to reach a consensus on supporting any of the proposed resolutions after a week of internal consultations. The Palestinian delegation was expected to consider bringing the drafts to a vote without broad European backing, according to the report.
Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, said the delegation was seeking to use the current political situation to challenge Israel at the international body.
“They are trying to exploit the situation to challenge us from the UN podium,” Danon said. “The Israeli delegation is working in close cooperation with our allies to confront this diplomatic attack.”
The Israeli mission was working behind the scenes to soften the wording of the proposed resolutions and reduce the number of countries that would support them, Ynet reported.
The diplomatic effort came amid heightened international scrutiny of Israeli settlement activity and settler violence in the West Bank.
In October, the United Nations Aid Coordination Office (OCHA) recorded at least 160 attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank by extremist Israeli settlers during the first two weeks of the olive harvest. The report also said the IDF and Israeli border police protected settlers and on occasion participated in attacks against Palestinians and their property.
The United Nations General Assembly and Security Council this week elected five new judges to the International Court of Justice, prompting alarm from Israel’s envoy to the UN, who said that some of the judges’ positions and statements are examples of the international body’s “institutional bias against Israel.”
Ambassador Danny Danon pointed to one of the judges accusing Israel of “ethnic cleansing” shortly after the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, invasion and massacre, and said another had advised a legal case against Israel.
The five judges elected Tuesday to serve on the UN court in The Hague were Dapo Akande of the United Kingdom, Francois Alabrune of France, Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud of Jordan, Rena Lee of Singapore, and Phoebe Okowa of Kenya.
The ICJ is composed of 15 judges, each of whom serve nine-year terms, with five judges elected every three years. These judges’ terms will begin in 2027 and end in 2036.
Two of the five newly elected judges, Hmoud and Okowa, are incumbent ICJ judges who were appointed in 2025 to fill vacant positions after their predecessors stepped down. They will now serve full terms on the bench.
Reacting to the election of the five new judges, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, said Wednesday on X, “Electing judges who have previously taken positions against Israel raises serious doubts about the Court’s impartiality.”
Danon pointed to statements made by the Jordanian judge, Hmoud, during a UN Security Council session on October 30, 2023, just weeks after the Hamas attack, in which he accused Israel of committing “ethnic cleansing” and “war crimes” during its nascent offensive against the terror group in Gaza.
Danon said Hmoud “absurdly accused Israel of war crimes just one month” after the massacre.
He also said that another of the newly elected ICJ judges “served as a legal adviser in proceedings against Israel.”
Danon did not identify which of the judges he was referring to or provide evidence. Two of the five new judges, Akande and Okowa, have previously served as legal advisers in ICJ proceedings against Israel’s policies in the West Bank.
Meet Mahmoud Hmoud. He was just elected to the International Court of Justice. He will sit on South Africa’s bogus “genocide” case against Israel. Hmoud used to be Jordan’s UN ambassador. Only three weeks after the October 7 massacre, he called “to punish Israel for war crimes.” https://t.co/iB1CgSivfb
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) November 5, 2026
Whistleblower Exposes UN Silence on Hamas: UN's former torture expert Alice Edwards denounces Francesca Albanese & Reem Alsalem for ignoring October 7 atrocities. “I think it is deliberate. They had all the opportunities. They are required to produce reports—and haven’t done so.”
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) November 5, 2026
Francesca Albanese: “Israel has always killed children... torture, even rape... raped by dogs trained in European countries. European people are profiting from selling dogs that will rape people.” Irish Sen. Chris Andrews: “Thank you for your ongoing advocacy. It's inspiring.” https://t.co/eFqQi6EOWz
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) November 5, 2026
@FranceskAlbs Like you, your husband is a dangerous nutcase who says Israel “invents” terrorist attacks. He equates the IDF fighting Hamas rocket launchers with the Nazis murdering Jews in the Warsaw ghetto. He flouted World Bank rules & deserved demotion: https://t.co/OjYi7AAPZZ
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) November 5, 2026
Israel Has Made Regime Change in Iran Its Main Strategic Objective
Seeking a lasting solution to the Iranian threat, Israel has adopted the ambitious objective of overthrowing the regime in the Islamic Republic. On Feb. 28, 2026, when the U.S. and Israel jointly launched the war against Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the aim was to remove the existential threat posed by Iran and create the conditions for Iranians to reclaim their country. On Oct. 18, he stated that Israel had adopted a policy of regime change in Iran.U.S. Is Removing Security Umbrella that Protects Arab Allies
Regime change has become the preferred alternative to endless cycles of sabotage and escalation. Israeli leaders seem to have concluded that fighting Iran's proxies while leaving their sponsor intact is unsustainable, since precise strikes can delay Tehran's capabilities only temporarily.
Iran's missile and drone strikes reinforced the view that the long-standing threat from Iran and its proxies stems from the regime's radical ideology, not just its capabilities. This shift in Israel's security thinking reflects a new assessment that the Iranian regime is weaker than ever.
Thomas Barrack, America's ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria and Iraq, laid out a significant change in U.S. Middle Eastern policy at the Global Security Forum in Doha, Qatar, on Oct. 20. "America as the guarantor to the world, for the last 80 years, it is no longer there." Applied to the Middle East, that means the Gulf states can no longer rely on the U.S. security umbrella.WSJ: Iran Turns to Guerrilla Tactics in Bid to Reassert Grip on Strait of Hormuz
"Everybody is saying if we have America and we are selling oil and gas in dollars and we buy weapons in dollars and we have bases of Americans...we are going to have free seas, and we are going to have a security guaranty. All of a sudden, that doesn't happen."
The erosion of U.S. security guarantees in the Gulf has been underway since 2019, when President Trump failed to respond to Iranian and Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia. As Houthi attacks on Saudi infrastructure escalated in the summer of 2026, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman personally asked Trump to take military action against the Iran-backed militia. Trump offered intelligence and targeting support but rejected direct U.S. military involvement.
Barrack explained, "The president has been clear that he supports Saudi Arabia, and the backing they need logistically he will supply, but America getting involved in a ground kinetic battle somewhere else sounds fruitless."
Surely many countries now hosting American bases will ask whether that still makes sense if it makes them targets of Iran and its proxies without providing security. The U.S. may ask itself about Iranian strikes against U.S. bases this year that have killed at least 21 Americans, wounded hundreds, and inflicted billions of dollars in damage. America must now choose between undertaking a costly effort to harden our bases and pulling back from the most vulnerable ones, a decision which may bring Tehran closer to its long-term goal of American withdrawal from the region.
Iran is resorting to guerrilla tactics to try to stop the flow of oil leaving the Strait of Hormuz.Hizbullah Today Is Run by Iran
Tehran has launched bomb-laden undersea drones, fired rocket-propelled grenades and deployed crews to attach limpet mines to ships that shuttle oil out of the Persian Gulf to waiting tankers.
The U.S. military in the region says the waterway is cleared of Iranian mines, but for weeks the IRGC has claimed that mines laid by its forces in the strait have damaged commercial ships.
Gulf officials say those assertions are designed to sow panic among shippers and doubts about the Americans' demining effort.
The scope of Iran's attacks has expanded, going beyond tankers to strike containerships, bulk carriers and gas carriers including those anchored outside the strait.
Last week, Hizbullah Secretary General Naim Qassem declared that Iran placed "ending Israeli aggression in Lebanon at the forefront of its priorities." His remarks underlined how Hizbullah is operating on a different plane than the Lebanese authorities, who negotiated a framework agreement with Israel last June.
Hizbullah today effectively appears to be run by Tehran. Since the group's political and military cadre were devastated by Israel in 2024, and Qassem took over from the assassinated Hassan Nasrallah, all the signs are that the group has been led directly by members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Since March 2, when Hizbullah entered the war, it has suffered significant setbacks. The Israelis have occupied a large area in southern Lebanon up to the Litani River, and in some places beyond it, before systematically razing all Shiite-majority villages in that area. In light of this, Hizbullah is facing rising, if understated, anger from within its Shiite community for the calamity that has befallen it.
Iran is wagering that countries such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but also Egypt and Jordan, seek to counterbalance Israeli dominance in the region. Amid the probable military disengagement of the U.S. from the Middle East, a classic balance of power game is taking shape, whereby countries are seeking to prevent the emergence of a regional hegemon, such as Israel. The Turks regard Hizbullah as a counterweight to Israel in Lebanon, and have allegedly allowed Iranian funds to reach Hizbullah through Turkey.
Iran's and Hizbullah's strategy is to stay the course in Lebanon, refuse to surrender Hizbullah's weapons to the Lebanese state and organize resistance operations against Israel. However, is reviving Hizbullah's resistance feasible? The nature of war has changed since the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon in May 2000.
Today, the Israelis have a panoply of remote means - drones, use of AI for intelligence gathering and armed robots - to control Lebanon, which does not require a heavy deployment of ground forces. Moreover, the Israelis have escalation dominance, which can include bombing Beirut, to impose its will on Lebanon, whereas Hizbullah's ability to similarly escalate appears more limited.
Tehran University Professor Hamzeh Safavi., Son of Former IRGC Chief: Iran Can Make Israel Uninhabitable with Kheibar-Shekan Missiles, Dirty Bombs, and Chemical Weapons – Real Deterrence Doesn’t Necessarily Require a Nuclear Weapon https://t.co/kUNHAMn9OW
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 5, 2026
Iranian Political Analyst Rouhollah Moddaber: Russia Provides Extensive Military, Intelligence, Political, And Economic Support to Iran; Moscow Supplied Iran with 21 Night-Vision Helicopters Disguised as Auxiliary Equipment https://t.co/Sj8lms6Ycx
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 5, 2026
Tehran’s “Trump in a Cage” Live Art Exhibition Culminates with the Mock-Execution of the U.S. President on the Anniversary of the U.S. Embassy Takeover https://t.co/o8KJt3lYIp
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 5, 2026
Lebanese Shiite Academic Ali Khalife Compares Hizbullah School System to the Hitler Youth: They Brainwash Children, Prepare Them to Become Fighters, and Accustom Them to Pointless Death; They Instill Loyalty to Iran’s Jurisprudent Ruler Over Lebanon https://t.co/Pc3JDzY4cR
— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 5, 2026
UNIFIL confirms it will start leaving south Lebanon when mandate ends on Dec. 31
The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) confirmed Thursday that it would start leaving the country at the end of the year, despite Beirut’s calls for the UN to extend the force’s mandate.Israeli Defense Ministry blows up 3,300 mines in Golan Heights
Amid Israeli criticism of UNIFIL, the UN Security Council voted last year not to extend the South Lebanon peacekeeping force’s nearly 50-year-old mandate.
“Under Security Council resolution 2790 (2025), UNIFIL’s mandate in Lebanon will end on 31 December 2026. The Mission will then begin the process of its drawdown and withdrawal,” UNIFIL said Thursday.
Until the mandate ends, “peacekeepers from 45 countries will continue their daily operations as usual across south Lebanon, including monitoring and reporting developments, liaising with the parties, supporting the Lebanese Army, and facilitating humanitarian missions,” UNIFIL said.
“The Security Council is considering options for the period after UNIFIL’s mandate ends, including future monitoring and reporting along the Blue Line,” UNIFIL said, adding that “decisions on any future arrangements rest with the Security Council.”
Lebanese officials have warned that UNIFIL’s departure could leave a vacuum in the country’s south, where Israel maintains a self-declared “security zone” that runs around 10 kilometers (six miles) inside southern Lebanon along the border. Beirut’s backers have scrambled to come up with an alternative to the peacekeeping force.
UNIFIL was created to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon after Israel’s 1978 invasion.
Following the month-long 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, UNIFIL’s mandate was expanded to ensure the Iran-backed terror group could not set up military infrastructure in southern Lebanon.
Israel has long accused UNIFIL of failing to fulfill its mission, pointing to Hezbollah’s extensive construction of border-area military infrastructure, which enabled the terror group to attack Israel on October 8, 2023, a day after the Hamas onslaught in southern Israel that sparked the Gaza war.
The Israeli Defense Ministry’s National Mine Action Authority has blown up some 3,300 mines near Kibbutz Ein Zivan on the Golan Heights in 2026, the body announced on Thursday.Hizbullah Returning to "Pilot" Areas in South Lebanon
“The National Mine Action Authority in the Defense Ministry is continuing to clear the minefields on the Golan Heights,” the statement said.
The authority works year-round to clear minefields and unexploded ordnance across the Jewish state as part of a multiyear plan to repurpose land suspected of being mined. The land is then used for farming, commerce, industry and housing.
Over the past year, the authority cleared more than 6,700 dunams (about 1,650 acres) of land suspected of holding mines and ordnance, including thousands of dunams on the Golan Heights, according to the ministry.
100 days have passed since the IDF handed control of three villages in southern Lebanon to the Lebanese army as part of a pilot program, but Hizbullah is gradually returning to the areas it evacuated to reactivate parts of its civilian networks and reestablish its influence among the local population.
Talks between Israel and Lebanon have been stalled for months, and there is still no agreement on how to ensure that the Lebanese army is actually dismantling Hizbullah's infrastructure.
Israeli officials say the Lebanese army is not conducting sufficient searches and is avoiding entering private homes or searching private property.
The IDF continues to hold defensive positions and continues clearing the area, although with significantly fewer troops than during the period of intensive operations.
⭕️OPERATIONAL UPDATE: IDF troops are operating in the Beaufort Ridge & Litani River areas in order to remove threats to Israeli civilians. During the operations, the troops located 340+ weapons, including RPG rockets, anti-tank missiles, mortar shells, small arms, explosive devices, grenades & ammunition. Additionally, a ~7m deep underground shaft was located inside a civilian home. The IDF will not allow the Hezbollah terrorist organization to harm Israeli civilians or IDF troops.
— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) November 5, 2026
Here is the Facebook post. He is further shown armed in a reel posted by the same person. His "GiGaza" profile confirms his age. He is listed by the Ministry of Health in their official list of innocent "children" killed in the war. END https://t.co/hDmxGiVqOe https://t.co/iWFdtHoZ0E
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) November 5, 2026
NPR Mimics UNIFIL Who Shields Hezbollah
While this went unacknowledged by UNIFIL and NPR, the broadcast quoted both a peacekeeper and UNIFIL’s deputy head, Hervé Lecoq for the proposition that without UNIFIL, “no one will be there to witness the destruction in South Lebanon.” Apparently, UNIFIL has eyes for some things.
In more audio of Lecoq, he lamented both that the U.S. pushed France out of “its prominent role in Lebanon in terms of contributing to security and . . . stability in the south” (ironic, given France’s ongoing difficulties with domestic security and stability) but also said fire has been “one-sided” from Israel since the U.S. brokered ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel. NPR added, by mimicking UNIFIL’s biases, that Hezbollah has largely abided by the ceasefire while Israel has consistently broken it.
CAMERA has written about NPR’s narrative shaping vis-à-vis the ceasefire in Lebanon. In addition to NPR not reporting Hezbollah violations, the ceasefire explicitly permitted Israel to operate in self-defense during the ceasefire, which it interpreted as dismantling Hezbollah infrastructure. Further, in a March 2026 U.N. Security Council report, in addition to the 1,900 ceasefire violations the U.N. acknowledged the Israeli military reported of Hezbollah, UNIFIL acknowledged that 90% of the 3,091 “violations of Lebanese airspace” it attributed to Israel were drones (and notably, UNIFIL observed only 11 air strikes in the approximately 4,682 overflight hours it observed).
The U.N. Security Council report also acknowledged Israel’s concern that Hezbollah was rearming faster than it was being disarmed by the Lebanese Armed Forces. Meanwhile, the U.N. said it is not in a position to substantiate allegations of arms transfers. Therefore, Hezbollah’s rearming is not logged. If Israel acts in response to Hezbollah’s rearming which goes unlogged, we can understand the origin of UNIFIL’s misleading statement, repeated by NPR, that fire is “one-sided.”
Arraf stated the Israeli position: that UNIFIL was never able to reign in Hezbollah. She immediately countered, wrongly, “but that was never their mandate, which focuses on monitoring the ceasefire and helping strengthen the Lebanese army.”
Without monitors, NPR reports Lecoq as saying, no one will be able to “verify Hezbollah threats from the south of Lebanon against Israel, the reason Israel has given for leveling large stretches of Lebanese border villages.” But UNIFIL hasn’t verified threats there anyway, and Hezbollah’s mere presence there violates ceasefire conditions. The IDF has been relegated to releasing photographic and video proof of the non-logged violations like Hezbollah tunnels, weapon stores, and their embedding in civilian infrastructure. In late 2025, CAMERA issued a press advisory on this issue.
Finally, Arraf remarked that without UNIFIL, “journalists will likely not be able to bear witness” in southern Lebanon, because UNIFIL has previously been able to take NPR “to report on the devastation.” Of course, NPR previously reported from Lebanese villages while being escorted by professional Hezbollah propagandists. UNIFIL is thus useless even to NPR.
IDF footage shows Hezbollah operating directly alongside a UNIFIL post in South Lebanon. Yet NPR’s @janearraf painted Israel as the villain for pushing UN peacekeepers out—ignoring how UNIFIL allowed Hezbollah to rearm and build terror tunnels right under their noses. https://t.co/rM68LO5Jyx
— CAMERA (@CAMERA4Truth) November 5, 2026
Hey @SBS, what's with referring to 2023 as "the year the conflict between Hamas and Israel boiled over." Water boils over. On October 7, Hamas-led terrorists massacred some 1,200 people, committed sexual violence, and abducted 251 hostages. Way to downplay Hamas' atrocities. https://t.co/5govROyNWd
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 5, 2026
A man filed a $50 million lawsuit against the New York Times because it didn't label the Gaza war a genocide, causing him to cry himself to sleep https://t.co/Ug4bkg1qTk
— Luke Tress (@luketress) November 5, 2026