After six months of war, Israel’s isolation grows with no end in sight

posted in: News | 0

By JOSEF FEDERMAN (Associated Press)

JERUSALEM (AP) — When Israel declared war against Hamas last October, it stood unified at home and enjoyed broad backing from around the world following an unprecedented attack by the Islamic group.

Six months later, Israel finds itself in a far different place: bogged down in Gaza, divided domestically, isolated internationally and increasingly at odds with its closest ally. The risk of a broader regional war remains real.

Despite Israel’s fierce military onslaught, Hamas is still standing, if significantly weakened. The offensive has pushed Gaza into a humanitarian crisis, displacing more than 80% of the population and leaving over 1 million people on the brink of starvation. Yet Israel hasn’t presented a postwar vision acceptable to its partners, and cease-fire talks remain at a standstill.

Here are six takeaways from the first six months of war.

BATTLEFIELD STALEMATE

Israel declared war in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7 cross-border attack, in which the group killed 1,200 people, most of them civilians, and kidnapped about 250 others. Hamas has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, Canada and the European Union.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set two objectives: destroying Hamas and bringing home the hostages. Despite his repeated pledges to achieve “total victory,” his goals remain elusive.

After steadily conquering most of Gaza in a bruising offensive, Israeli ground troops are in a holding pattern marked by small tactical operations and uncertainty over whether the army will march into the southern Gaza city of Rafah, Hamas’ last significant stronghold.

Netanyahu has repeatedly vowed to invade Rafah, but he faces broad international opposition, including from the United States, because of the hundreds of thousands of displaced Palestinians sheltering there. Netanyahu claims to have a plan to evacuate the civilians, but it isn’t clear whether it is ready or would satisfy the Americans.

Even if Israel does invade Rafah, there is no guarantee of long-term success. Although Hamas appears to have suffered heavy losses, its forces have managed to regroup in areas abandoned by Israel.

At the same time, Israel hasn’t been able to halt the daily attacks it faces on its northern front from the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. In contrast to Hamas, Hezbollah’s much larger arsenal remains intact, leaving the fate of tens of thousands of uprooted civilians on both sides of the border up in the air. The tensions have threatened to drag in Hezbollah’s sponsor, Iran, especially after an airstrike widely attributed to Israel killed two Iranian generals in neighboring Syria this week.

GROWING ISOLATION

Israel enjoyed broad international support following the Oct. 7 massacre, which was the deadliest attack against Jews since the Holocaust. However, that goodwill has been replaced by impatience and outrage as conditions in Gaza worsen.

Related Articles


Israel dismisses 2 officers after deadly aid convoy strike


Biden tells Israel’s Netanyahu future US support for war depends on new steps to protect civilians


Israel says large gaps remain with Hamas over Gaza cease-fire


Bret Stephens: The appalling tactics of the ‘Free Palestine’ movement


US braces for retaliation after attack on Iran consulate — even as it says it wasn’t involved

More than 33,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war, around two-thirds of them women and children, according to Palestinian health officials whose death toll doesn’t distinguish between civilians and fighters. International aid officials say roughly one-third of Gaza’s population is dealing with catastrophic hunger.

Initial expressions of solidarity from Israel’s allies have given way to calls for a halt to the fighting. Meanwhile, the U.N. world court, looking into genocide allegations against Israel, has ordered Israel to do more to protect Gaza’s civilians.

This isolation appeared to peak on March 25, when the U.N. Security Council, over Israeli objections, passed a resolution demanding an immediate cease-fire. The U.S. infuriated Israel by allowing the resolution to pass.

Things have only worsened for Israel since then, especially following its killing of seven aid workers in what it says was an errant airstrike. Six of the victims were volunteers from countries allied with Israel, antagonizing them and outraging U.S. President Joe Biden. The alleged Israeli airstrike on an Iran’s embassy in Syria and Netanyahu’s efforts to shutter the Arab satellite channel Al Jazeera have further alienated allies.

ISRAEL IS DIVIDED

After a period of broad unity early in the war, Israel has returned to its divided self — with its polarizing leader at the center of the storm.

Weekly protests against the government have grown and attract thousands. They are rooted in longstanding grievances against Netanyahu — from his political alliances with far-right and ultra-Orthodox parties to his open-ended corruption trial. However, they have drawn new strength from his failure to bring home the hostages. Roughly half of the hostages were released during a weeklong cease-fire in November. But Israel says 134 remain in captivity.

Israel has already declared more than 30 hostages dead — and there are widespread fears that the true number is higher and will continue to rise the longer they are held.

The plight of the hostages and the anguished cries of their families have resonated deeply with the Israeli public. Some hostage families were among the tens of thousands of people who took to the streets this week calling on the government to resign. It was the largest anti-government demonstration since the war began.

NETANYAHU ISN’T GOING ANYWHERE

Netanyahu’s popularity has plummeted since the outbreak of the war, with many holding him responsible for the intelligence and security failures that allowed the Oct. 7 attack to occur. Yet he has rebuffed calls to resign or launch investigations into what went wrong.

Netanyahu faces no immediate threat to his rule. For now, his coalition partners, also facing likely losses at the polls, remain firmly behind him.

Ironically, the biggest immediate threat to Netanyahu is only peripherally related to the war. Israel’s Supreme Court has ordered a halt to a long-standing controversial system of exempting ultra-Orthodox men from compulsory military service.

With over 600 soldiers killed since Oct. 7, Netanyahu will have a tough time continuing this system. But if he tries to force religious men into military service, he could lose the support of his ultra-Orthodox partners and be forced into early elections.

“Netanyahu is incapable of either feeling shame or taking responsibility,” wrote Anshel Pfeffer, a Haaretz columnist and author of a Netanyahu biography. “He has no intention of ever resigning on his own accord.”

HAMAS ISN’T GOING ANYWHERE

The Israeli offensive has caused mass destruction across Gaza and inflicted heavy losses on Hamas. Israel claims to have killed some 13,000 Hamas fighters and dismantled the group’s military capabilities across most of Gaza.

Yet even if these claims are true, Hamas is still intact in Rafah, and its fighters have regrouped in areas where Israel previously declared victory. Although there have been small shows of public discontent with Hamas in Gaza, there have been no public signs of broad opposition to the group.

Khalil Sayegh, a Palestinian analyst, said Hamas keeps reappearing and Israel hasn’t allowed any alternative to emerge.

“When you’re fighting a guerrilla war, I think the ultimate success or failure is whether you’re able to survive,” he said. “So if Hamas survives as a governing body, then this will be a success.”

Michael Milshtein, a former high-ranking Israeli military intelligence officer who is now an expert in Palestinian studies at Tel Aviv University, says Israel faces two unappealing choices: Accept a hostage and cease-fire deal that acknowledges Hamas has survived, or step up the military campaign and conquer Gaza in hopes that Hamas will eventually be destroyed.

He said expectations that the Israeli military’s current approach can destroy Hamas or force it to surrender is “wishful thinking.”

NO POSTWAR POLICY

There is no consensus for the future of Gaza.

Netanyahu has presented a vague vision that calls for open-ended Israeli control of the territory, with local Palestinian partners in Gaza administering day-to-day affairs. Israel hopes for reconstruction to be funded by the international community, including wealthy Arab Gulf states.

These plans, though, clash with visions promoted by the U.S., other international partners and the Palestinians.

The U.S. has called for a return of the internationally recognized Palestinian Authority, which Hamas ousted from Gaza in 2007, and for renewed efforts to establish an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The PA, based in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, recently appointed a new prime minister to address American calls for reform.

Netanyahu opposes Palestinian statehood or any role for the PA. Meanwhile, there is little appetite among donor nations to contribute to reconstruction without a political consensus. The United Arab Emirates, for instance, says it will not fund reconstruction without a viable two-state approach.

Ofer Shelah, a former lawmaker who is now a senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, said the battlefield successes are “almost meaningless” without a diplomatic vision.

“The real threat to Hamas will not be Israeli tanks or warplanes. It’s an alternative to running life in postwar Gaza,” he said.

Associated Press reporters Melanie Lidman and Julia Frankel contributed.

Former Trump officials are among the most vocal opponents of returning him to the White House

posted in: Politics | 0

By MICHELLE L. PRICE (Associated Press)

NEW YORK (AP) — Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper has called him a “threat to democracy.” Former national security adviser John Bolton has declared him “unfit to be president.” And former Vice President Mike Pence has declined to endorse him, citing “profound differences.”

As Donald Trump seeks the presidency for a third time, he is being vigorously opposed by a vocal contingent of former officials who are stridently warning against his return to power and offering dire predictions for the country and the rule of law if his campaign succeeds.

It’s a striking chorus of detractors, one without precedent in the modern era, coming from those who witnessed first-hand his conduct in office and the turmoil that followed.

Sarah Matthews, a former Trump aide who testified before the House Jan. 6 committee and is among those warning about the threat he poses, said it’s “mind-boggling” how many members of his senior staff have denounced him.

“These are folks who saw him up close and personal and saw his leadership style,” Matthews said.

“The American people should listen to what these folks are saying because it should be alarming that the people that Trump hired to work for him a first term are saying that he’s unfit to serve for a second term.”

Yet the critics remain a distinct minority. Republican lawmakers and officials across the party have endorsed Trump’s bid — some begrudgingly, others with fervor and enthusiasm. Many aides and Cabinet officials who served under Trump are onboard for another term, something Trump’s campaign is quick to highlight.

“The majority of the people who served in President Trump’s cabinet and in his administration, like the majority of Americans, have overwhelmingly endorsed his candidacy to beat Crooked Joe Biden and take back the White House,” said Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung.

Still, the Biden campaign has trumpeted the criticism of former Trump officials in statements and social media posts, hoping to convince at least some Republican voters — including those who backed other candidates during the GOP primary — that they cannot support his candidacy.

“Those who worked with Donald Trump at the most senior levels of his administration believe he is too dangerous, too selfish and too extreme to ever lead our country again — we agree,” said Biden campaign spokesman Ammar Moussa.

In many ways, the schism among former Trump officials is an extension of his time in the White House. Friction was constant as Trump’s demands ran into resistance from some officials and aides who refused requests that they found misguided, unrealistic and, at times, flatly illegal. Firings were frequent. Many quit.

Staff upheaval was particularly intense in the chaotic weeks after the 2020 election as Trump worked to overturn his election loss to Biden. Trump summoned supporters to Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, as his falsehoods about a stolen election became the rallying cry for supporters who violently breached the U.S. Capitol. Many people serving in the administration quit in protest, including Matthews.

Trump’s attempt to remain in office included a bitter pressure campaign against Pence, who as vice president was tasked with presiding over the count of the Electoral College ballots on Jan. 6. Trump was adamant that Pence should prevent Biden from becoming president, something he had no power to do. Pence had to flee the Senate chamber on Jan. 6 as rioters stormed the building to chants of “Hang Mike Pence!”

Pence recently said he “cannot in good conscience” endorse Trump because of Jan. 6 and other issues, despite being proud of what they achieved together.

And Pence is not alone.

Esper, who was fired by Trump days after the 2020 election, clashed with the then-president over several issues, including Trump’s push to deploy military troops to respond to civil unrest after the killing of George Floyd by police in 2020.

In a recent interview with HBO’s “Real Time With Bill Maher,” Esper repeated a warning that Trump is “a threat to democracy” and added, “I think there’s a lot to be concerned about.”

“There’s no way I’ll vote for Trump, but every day that Trump does something crazy, the door to voting for Biden opens a little bit more, and that’s where I’m at,” Esper said.

Related Articles

National Politics |


NY is state demanding more information on Trump’s $175 million appeal bond in civil fraud case

National Politics |


Freedom Caucuses push for conservative state laws, but getting attention is their big success

National Politics |


Judge rejects Trump request to dismiss classified documents prosecution

National Politics |


No Labels won’t run a third-party campaign after trying to recruit a centrist presidential candidate

National Politics |


Judge rejects Donald Trump’s request to delay hush-money trial until Supreme Court rules on immunity

Among Trump’s most vocal critics are former aides who worked closely with him in the White House, particularly a trio who gained prominence testifying about the Jan. 6 attack and Trump’s push to overturn the election.

The group includes Matthews, former Trump White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin and Cassidy Hutchinson, a former top aide to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows. They have given a series of interviews in recent months opposing their former boss.

“Fundamentally, a second Trump term could mean the end of American democracy as we know it, and I don’t say that lightly,” Griffin told ABC in December.

John Kelly, Trump’s former chief of staff, had his own long falling-out with Trump. Kelly, in a lengthy October statement to CNN, described Trump as “a person who admires autocrats and murderous dictators” and “has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution, and the rule of law.”

Olivia Troye, a former Pence adviser who left the White House in 2020, and former press secretary Stephanie Grisham, who resigned Jan. 6, are both outspoken critics who said they didn’t vote for Trump in 2020.

Even Bill Barr, Trump’s former attorney general who has not ruled out voting for him again, has referred to Trump as “a consummate narcissist” who “constantly engages in reckless conduct that puts his political followers at risk and the conservative and Republican agenda at risk.”

Still, the ranks of former Trump officials opposing his bid are greatly outnumbered by those who are supportive.

Linda McMahon, who headed the Small Business Administration under Trump, is co-chairing a major fundraiser for the former president on Saturday in Florida, along with former Trump Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.

McMahon is also chair of the board of The America First Policy Institute, which is packed with supportive former Trump officials and has been described as an “administration in waiting” for a second Trump term.

The institute is headed by Brooke Rollins, Trump’s former domestic policy chief, and counts Pence’s national security adviser and retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg among its chairs, along with former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Trump’s U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer, and former National Economic Council director Larry Kudlow.

Former acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker has campaigned for Trump, as has former Housing Secretary Ben Carson, who called him “a friend of America.”

Trump’s also got the backing of former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, former Interior Secretary and Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, and Russell Vought, who ran Trump’s Office of Management and Budget.

Vought said in a post on X that Trump is “the only person I trust to take a wrecking ball to the Deep State.”

Trump supporters are also quick to dismiss critics in the party.

Carmen McVane, who attended Trump’s rally Tuesday in Green Bay, Wisconsin, said those who speak negatively against Trump or refuse to endorse are RINOs, or Republicans In Name Only, and will only help Biden and Democrats.

“There’s a lot of RINOs who don’t do what they’re supposed to do,” McVane said. “It’s time for everyone to back who we have and go full force ahead.”

Associated Press writer Adriana Gomez Licon in Green Bay, Wisconsin, contributed to this report.

After 40 years in the Twins’ broadcast booth, Dick Bremer ready to transition to the diamond

posted in: News | 0

Travel across the state about 200 miles west and slightly north of the Twin Cities and you’ll run into the tiny town of Dumont, population 75. That is where Dick Bremer was raised and where he learned to love the game of baseball when he was growing up.

“The town team played in the backyard,” Bremer said. “A town that small, what is there to do? If the team’s playing, you’re going to go watch.”

The Twins’ longtime play-by-play announcer may have left the television booth after 40 seasons, but the love for the sport instilled in him while growing up in Dumont is unyielding, so it’s certainly no surprise that his retirement plans center around baseball.

“It occurred to me that all these great guys that I worked with, Harmon (Killebrew), Bert (Blyleven), Jim Kaat, all of them, Justin (Morneau), they all had great playing careers and then great broadcasting careers,” Bremer said. “I’m going to try to do it in reverse.”

Yes, Bremer has joined a senior baseball league. He’ll be playing single games on Wednesday nights and doubleheaders on Sundays.

He’ll also be around the ballpark a lot, though if the weather’s nice, the golf course might beckon. He joked that he’s been told it’s possible to catch a walleye in Minnesota without having to drill a hole in the ice. He’ll finally get his chance to see — without much time off during the baseball season for the past four decades, he hasn’t had much time to do much summertime fishing, so that’s another thing he’s looking forward to with more free time.

The Twins invited Bremer and his family out to the ballpark on Thursday, where he first helped unveil the newly rededicated Dick Bremer TV Booth in the Target Field press box, yanking a red covering off a plaque bearing his image and career accomplishments.

“He really, in so many ways, knits the fabric of multiple years of Twins baseball together, from the Metrodome, ultimately, to opening Target Field and beyond,” team president and CEO Dave St. Peter said. “… It’s hard to imagine there’s any broadcaster that we’ve had that has worked more tirelessly on behalf of the organization to preach the gospel of Twins baseball than Dick Bremer.”

He then continued on to the field, where fans were treated to a highlight reel of some of his signature calls. After Twins victories, Bremer would post a left-handed toast on social media, and as he got situated on the field, he raised a water bottle in his left hand to toast the crowd.

Bremer then delivered the ceremonial first pitch to Joe Mauer, whose whole career he called from the booth, to cheers from the Target Field crowd.

“I was lucky to be intimately involved with a Major League Baseball team, forget the fact that it was the team that I grew up following when I was a little kid,” Bremer said, choking up with emotions at times while he spoke. “I’ve been really blessed.”

And now, he’s ready for his next adventure.

After a career that saw him call nearly 5,000 Twins games, work alongside five hall of famers (Blyleven, Killebrew, Kaat, Paul Molitor and Jack Morris), and become the voice of Twins Territory, he’s ready to test his own talents on the diamond.

“I did my 40 years in broadcasting and now my goal is to be the oldest American League Rookie of the Year ever at age 68,” Bremer said.

Sign up for the Twins Report, our free newsletter, to keep up on local baseball news, updates and insights. Subscribe by following the prompts at twincities.com/newsletters.

Related Articles

Minnesota Twins |


Nashville holds Saints to 4 hits, wins game in 10th

Minnesota Twins |


As he returns to outfield, Twins figuring out Byron Buxton’s workload day-by-day

Minnesota Twins |


Strikeouts pile up in Twins’ home-opening loss to Guardians

Minnesota Twins |


Coming to the Twins’ home opener on Thursday? Here’s what to expect

Minnesota Twins |


Ryan Jeffers, Twins break through late in win over Brewers

Americans think a president’s power should be checked, poll finds — unless their side wins

posted in: Politics | 0

By NICHOLAS RICCARDI and LINLEY SANDERS (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Like many Americans, Richard Bidon says he’d like to see the U.S. government “go back to its original design” — a system of checks and balances developed nearly 240 years ago to prevent any branch, especially the presidency, from becoming too powerful.

But that’s mainly when Republicans are in power.

Bidon, an 84-year-old Democrat who lives near Los Angeles, said if President Joe Biden is reelected, he doesn’t want him to have to get the approval of a possibly Republican-controlled Congress to enact policies to slow climate change. He wants presidents to have the power to change policy unilaterally — as long as they’re from the right party.

“When a Democrat’s in, I support” a strong presidency, Bidon said. “When Republicans are in, I don’t support it that much. It’s sort of a wishy-washy thing.”

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Opinion Research finds that Bidon’s view is common. Though Americans say don’t want a president to have too much power, that view shifts if the candidate of their party wins the presidency. It’s a view held by members of both parties, though it’s especially common among Republicans.

Overall, only about 2 in 10 Americans say it would be “a good thing” for the next president to be able to change policy without waiting on Congress or the courts. But nearly 6 in 10 Republicans say it would be good for a future President Donald Trump to take unilateral action, while about 4 in 10 Democrats say the same if Biden is reelected.

The sentiment comes amid escalating polarization and is a sign of the public’s willingness to push the boundaries of the political framework that has kept the U.S. a stable democracy for more than two centuries. In the poll, only 9% of Americans say the nation’s system of checks and balances is working extremely or very well. It also follows promises by Trump to “act as a dictator” on day one of a new administration to secure the border and expand oil and gas drilling.

Bob Connor, a former carpenter now on disability in Versailles, Missouri, wants that type of decisive action on the border. He’s given up hope on Congress taking action.

“From what I’ve seen, the Republicans are trying to get some stuff done, the Democrats are trying to get some other stuff done — they’re not mixing in the middle,” said Connor, 56. “We’re not getting anywhere.”

He blames the influx of migrants on Biden unilaterally revoking some of Trump’s own unilateral border security policies when he took office.

“I’m not a Trump fanatic, but what he’s saying has to get done is right,” Connor said.

Joe Titus, a 69-year-old Democrat from Austin, Texas, believes Republicans have destroyed Congress’ ability to act in its traditional legislative role and says Biden will have to step into the gap.

“There’s this so-called ‘majority’ in Congress, and they’re a bunch of whack-jobs,” Titus, a retired Air Force mechanic, said of the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. “It’s not the way this thing was set up.”

The current Congress is setting dubious records as the least productive one in the country’s history, with fewer than three dozen bills sent to Biden’s desk last year. At Trump’s urging, House Republicans have stalled aid to Ukraine and a bipartisan immigration bill.

Titus said that in general he opposes expanded presidential power but would support Biden funding more immigration judges and sending additional aid to Ukraine on his own.

“There’s certain things that it seems to me the public wants and the other party is blocking,” Titus said.

The presidency has steadily gained power in recent years as congressional deadlocks have become more common. Increasingly, the nation’s chief executive is moving to resolve issues through administrative policy or executive orders. The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to rule later this year on a case that could significantly weaken the ability of federal agencies — and thus a presidential administration — to issue regulations.

Meanwhile, conservatives are planning a takeover of the federal bureaucracy should they win the White House in November, a move that could increase the administration’s ability to make sweeping policy changes on its own.

Related Articles

National Politics |


NY is state demanding more information on Trump’s $175 million appeal bond in civil fraud case

National Politics |


Freedom Caucuses push for conservative state laws, but getting attention is their big success

National Politics |


Judge rejects Trump request to dismiss classified documents prosecution

National Politics |


No Labels won’t run a third-party campaign after trying to recruit a centrist presidential candidate

National Politics |


Judge rejects Donald Trump’s request to delay hush-money trial until Supreme Court rules on immunity

The AP-NORC poll found that voters’ views of which institutions have too much power were colored by their own partisanship. Only 16% of Democrats, whose party currently controls the White House, say the presidency has too much power while nearly half of Republicans believe it does. In contrast, about 6 in 10 Democrats say the U.S. Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, has too much power.

With Congress evenly divided between the two parties — the GOP has a narrow House majority, Democrats a narrow Senate one — Americans have similar views on its power regardless of party. About 4 in 10 from both major parties say it has too much power.

“I think Congress had too much power when the presidency and Congress were both ruled by Democrats, but now that Republicans are in the majority there’s an equal balance,” said John V. Mohr, a 62-year-old housecleaner in Wilmington, North Carolina.

In contrast, he complained that Biden is “sitting there writing executive orders left and right,” including his proclamation marking Transgender Day of Visibility, which fell on Easter Sunday this year.

The abstract idea of a president with nearly unchecked power remains unpopular.

Steven Otney, a retired trucker in Rock Hill, South Carolina, said major policies should be approved by Congress and gain approval from the courts. But he also said it depends on the topic. He wants to see prompt action on certain issues by the next president if he’s Trump.

“Some things need to be done immediately, like that border wall being finished,” said Otney, a Republican.

He said it’s just common sense.

“If Trump got in there and said ‘I want to bomb Iran,’ no, that’s crazy,” Otney said. “Within reason, not stupid stuff either way. Something to help the American people, not hurt us.”

The poll of 1,282 adults was conducted March 21-25, 2024, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.

Riccardi reported from Denver.

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.