We were pleased to record a session with Jonathan Schanzer, Executive Director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and we are pleased to share the podcast with you. Jonathan wrote recently, “Israel stood unwavering in the face of withering assaults, one more punishing than the next. And with help from the American president, it emerged from the fighting bruised but intact.” The situation is not perfect, and may never be, but his assessment offers reason for optimism and suggests a path forward.

The Gaza “ceasefire” lasted only until Hamas refused to return the bodies of the deceased Israeli hostages. Since then, Hamas sent civilians to violate the IDF lines, has forsworn disarmament, and has been murdering Palestinians in the streets of Gaza. Some people – including in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain – are becoming nervous. As they should. And the US position appears to need modification. Join us for a conversation with Or Yissachar, Executive Director of the David Institute for Policy and Strategy, an arm of the Israel Defense and Security Forum (IDSF-Habithonistim).

Many people have been holding their breath for the past two years, unsure that the Abraham Accords – the brilliant accomplishment of the first Trump administration – could withstand the pressures of the war in Gaza. We admit to being among them. But not only have the Accords survived, it now seems that they are ripe for expansion as parts of the Arab and Muslim world reject the vicious terrorist philosophy of Hamas, Hezbollah, and their sponsor, Iran. Join us as David Schenker, Taube Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute and former US diplomat, takes us through the region to understand the resilience of the Accords and the political winds blowing through the Arab world and beyond.

While our attention has been taken up largely with events in the Middle East, China has been pursuing its own long-term regional goals – some of which are inimical to American interests and the interests of America’s allies. What has China been doing? How does Washington understand China’s increasing military confidence? Is the US assessment evolving – and have US capabilities kept pace? Join us as former Pentagon official and security specialist Stephen Bryen brings us an analysis of China’s growing military capabilities and the geopolitical challenges Beijing presents in the Indo-Pacific region.

Reports coming from Lebanon are, in many ways, encouraging – the Lebanese government, it seems, is done with Hezbollah and the wreckage of a once-beautiful and prosperous country. The question is, can the government carry out the mandate to remove Hezbollah, its weapons and its influence and create peaceful relations with Israel? Hussain Abdul-Hussain, research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, walks us through the disparate threads of Lebanese politics – from the comforting and hopeful to the skeptical, cynical, and despairing. A Crumbling but Shifting Status Quo Hussein Abdel-Hussain cautiously celebrated what he called one of the most consequential developments in Lebanon’s modern history: the weakening of Hezbollah following the reported assassination of its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, and what he described as Israel’s “crushing” of Hezbollah’s operational capabilities. This surprising turn of events has opened what he characterizes as a “window of opportunity” for the Lebanese state to reclaim sovereignty and redefine itself as more neutral and nationally focused. Although Hezbollah and its Shia political partner Amal initially agreed to a cessation of hostilities in late November 2024, they have since moved the goalposts. Specifically, Hezbollah now demands Israeli withdrawal from strategic hilltops before it will even consider discussions on disarmament, thus reverting back to old patterns of negotiation delay and defiance—strategies previously employed by figures like Yasser Arafat. Legal and Political Breakthroughs Despite Hezbollah’s resistance, the Lebanese government has achieved a historic milestone. For the first time since 1969, the Cabinet passed a resolution asserting that only state institutions are authorized to bear arms inside Lebanon. This directly challenges Hezbollah’s decades-long extralegal military presence. Even more remarkably, the decision was made with Hezbollah-affiliated ministers still in the temporary caretaker government, giving the resolution additional political weight. The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) have been officially tasked with drafting a plan to disarm Hezbollah—a move that underscores a shift from rhetorical opposition to potential enforcement. A meeting to review the military’s disarmament plan is set, though the LAF has indicated that a full disarmament could take 15 months, well beyond the end-of-the-year deadline set by the Cabinet. The Struggle of the Lebanese Armed Forces The Lebanese military, although increasingly seen as the backbone of national unity and sovereignty, faces severe logistical, operational, and financial challenges. Salaries have plunged to poverty levels due to the economic collapse, and the rank-and-file soldiers struggle with basic needs—including fuel and clean drinking water. Many soldiers hold second jobs to survive, and troop numbers are insufficient to handle complex disarmament tasks. While the United States once provided $144 million annually to support the LAF, this aid has intermittently lapsed due to political friction and has recently been replaced by funding from Qatar, which raises concerns about foreign influence. Qatar and Turkey: External Influences and Islamist Ambitions Abdel-Hussain expressed discomfort with growing Qatari—and increasingly Turkish—influence in Lebanon, particularly within the Sunni community in the north and in Beirut. These nations, he warned, are promoting Islamist factions aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. This power vacuum, created by Saudi Arabia’s retreat from Lebanon since 2017, has allowed pro-Qatar and pro-Turkey candidates to gain municipal influence. Worse yet, Turkey is replicating strategies previously demonstrated by Iran—investing in loyalist militias and seeking political hegemony in Syria and Lebanon alike. Abdel-Hussain emphasized that Turkey’s intelligence chief-turned-foreign minister Hakan Fidan could become the “new Qassem Soleimani” in terms of aspiring

Jewish Policy Center Senior Director Shoshana Bryen hosted Professor Mark Meirowitz, a foreign policy and Turkey expert from SUNY Maritime College, for a deep dive into Ankara’s growing regional role, its involvement in Syria’s evolution, and its increasingly fraught relationship with Israel. With characteristic clarity and urgency, Prof. Meirowitz broke down the labyrinth of regional alliances and rivalries, calling the situation “literally mind-boggling” and comparing Syria to a “petri dish for chaos.” HTS, Al-Shara, and the Shake-up in Syria The ousting of Bashar Assad by the jihadist group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Ahmed al-Shara (also known as al-Jolani), marks a significant shift in Syria’s power structure—and possibly the region’s. Once associated with al-Qaeda and ISIS, al-Jolani now wears suits and promotes a veneer of moderation. “Maybe the Turks provided him with some of these outfits,” Meirowitz quipped, questioning the authenticity of his transformation. Al-Jolani was “boosted by” Turkish support, Meirowitz explained, calling him a Turkish client rather than an independent actor. HTS’s limited control—bolstered by foreign fighters like Uyghurs—has led to violent, sectarian repression, particularly against Alawites, Druze, Christians, and Kurds. “We’re with al-Shara, and a lot of people are depending on him,” Meirowitz said ominously. Turkey’s Interests: Stabilizing Syria to Serve Domestic Needs Turkey’s involvement, Meirowitz stressed, is strategic. With over 3 million Syrian refugees inside its borders, Ankara is pressuring Damascus to stabilize and repatriate them. “The Turks want them back to Syria,” he said, noting the domestic strain and political sensitivity of the refugee crisis. Turkey has walked a fine line—signing infrastructure and defense agreements with HTS-controlled Syria while avoiding giving it full military autonomy. “Turkey’s position is that Al-Shara is the go-to person… Let al-Shara unify the country,” Meirowitz explained. But internal Kurdish dynamics—particularly involving PKK, now in peace talks with Erdogan’s government—make full alignment with HTS and Syrian Kurds tenuous. Will Turkey’s NATO Membership Complicate It All? One of the more sobering insights from Meirowitz was the hypothetical scenario of Turkey, a NATO power, declaring a no-fly zone over Syria—potentially triggering Article 5 protections if hostilities break out with Israel. “That, to me, is the number one worry… that Israel and Turkey would come to conflict,” he warned. He emphasized the ongoing “deconfliction meetings” between Israel and Turkey, and Israel and Syria—possibly triangulating with al-Jolani himself. But of all the moving parts, Meirowitz emphasized Turkey’s NATO status remains a critical leverage point: “Let’s be realistic here. If there was a skirmish…Article 5 could be on the table.” Humanitarian Crises and Jihadi Control: Who is Really Running Syria? The ongoing massacres of minorities, particularly the Druze in Suweida, raise urgent questions about al-Jolani’s power. “Has he lost control over the jihadis in his own ranks?” Meirowitz pondered, highlighting the grim possibility of Syria spiraling toward becoming a full-blown jihadi state. “The optics are totally opposed to [the idea of moderation],” he said, noting public executions and forced beard-shaving of Druze men as disturbing parallels to Nazi visual propaganda. “Clearly, this is reprehensible. The United States isn’t going to stand for it,” he added, referring to conditional American Congressional support for lifting sanctions on Syria.  Erdogan’s Domestic Calculations: Kurds, Elections, and Power Turning inward, Turkey’s President Erdoğan is eyeing another term in 2028. Despite constitutional term limits, he may seek early elections or amendments—with the support of Kurdish parliamentarians. “He’s very popular in Turkey,” Meirowitz said, crediting Erdoğan’s projection of Turkey as a global power broker. “Turkey’s

Hussein Abdel Hussein, a distinguished research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, joined us today to share his expertise on Middle Eastern politics, particularly focusing on the Druze community and regional dynamics. As a leading authority on the subject, Hussein brings extensive knowledge about the complexities of Syrian politics, inter-community relations, and the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. His insights have been particularly valuable in understanding the current situation facing the Druze community, their defensive mindset, and the intricate relationships between various regional powers. Hussein’s deep understanding of Middle Eastern sovereignty challenges and his experience in analyzing regional conflicts makes him uniquely qualified to address the complex issues facing Syria and its minority communities. Druze Community and Israeli Intervention The meeting focused on the situation in Syria, particularly the Druze community and Israel’s intervention to protect them. Hussein Abdel Hussein, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explained the unique characteristics of the Druze, including their defensive mindset and loyalty to their host countries. He emphasized that the recent violence in Syria was not initiated by the Druze, who were instead defending themselves against invaders. The discussion highlighted the complexities of Middle Eastern politics and the challenges of prioritizing democratic elections and individual rights in a region with a different cultural and societal focus. Druze Plight and Shara’s Leadership Hussain discussed the situation in Syria, focusing on the Druze community’s plight and the actions of the new leader, Ahmad Shara, who previously had ties to Al-Qaeda. He criticized the approach of giving Islamists financial support, citing past failures, and emphasized the need for conditions to be set for Shara to gain trust. Hussain praised Israel’s intervention to protect the Druze and expressed frustration with Western countries, particularly the UK and France, for not supporting the Druze and for their previous role in backing Shara. He also highlighted the importance of shared power and concessions from Shara to ensure the safety of minority groups in Syria. Syria Post-Assad Governance Strategy Hussain and Shoshana discussed the situation in Syria, emphasizing the lack of a concrete plan for post-Assad governance. Hussain argued that the U.S. and its allies could support non-Islamist factions like the Druze, Kurds, and Christians without direct military involvement, focusing on diplomatic and economic support. They highlighted the roles of Turkey, Qatar, and Iran in supporting Sunni Islamists and the need to exclude these countries from any reconstruction plan. Hussain proposed aligning with allies like the UAE, Kuwait, Morocco, Israel, and Cyprus to create a stable, inclusive Syria under Assad’s presidency, with concessions made to him in exchange for cooperation. Druze Attacks: Turkish-Israeli Proxy War Hussain discussed the brutal attacks on the Druze in Syria, highlighting the involvement of two major clans from the northeast, Gaddat and Naim, which he believes were orchestrated by Syrian intelligence and Turkish interests, rather than being a simple tribal revenge. Shoshana raised questions about whether Al-Shara was directing these attacks and expressed skepticism about the possibility of a lasting peace if the attackers are true Islamists. Hussain explained that the main driver of the conflict in Syria is the competition between Turkey and Israel, and he suggested that the attack on the Druze was part of Turkey’s strategy to establish a foothold on the border with Israel. US-Turkey-Qatar Relations: Strategic Challenges Shoshana and Hussain discussed the complex dynamics between the US, Turkey, and Qatar, highlighting the challenges of balancing relations with Turkey as a NATO

The Jewish Policy Center hosted a webinar featuring Professor Harold Rhode, an expert in Middle Eastern history and culture, to discuss the recent developments involving the Hebron sheikhs, tribal dynamics in the West Bank, and the broader Middle Eastern context, including Syria and the Druze. Key points from the discussion include: Hebron Sheikhs and Tribal Dynamics In Middle Eastern society, loyalty is to family, clan, and tribe, not nationality or land. The Hebron sheikhs, representing local clans, have proposed creating an autonomous “Hebron Emirate” in cooperation with Israel, recognizing it as a Jewish state. These sheikhs view the Palestinian Authority (PA) as foreign and illegitimate, imposed on them by outsiders through the Oslo Accords. The PA is perceived as weak in Hebron, and the sheikhs have governed themselves effectively for generations. Clan structures dictate marriage, loyalty, and governance, making Western political models like individual rights hard to apply. Implications for the Palestinian Authority The PA has dismissed the Hebron initiative as Israeli propaganda. However, the reality on the ground suggests strong opposition to PA rule from local clans. Efforts to crush or dismiss these tribal leaders could backfire, weakening the PA further. Broader Regional Dynamics and Gaza Similar clan-based governance could be applied in Gaza, provided Israel supports and protects cooperative families. Past Israeli failures to protect allies (e.g., during withdrawal from southern Lebanon or early Gaza operations) undercut potential partnerships. To succeed, Israel must demonstrate strength and reliability, which are critical virtues in the Middle East. Violence and Power in the Region Peace, as understood in the West, doesn’t exist in Middle Eastern political culture. The best outcome is enforced calm through strength. Groups like Hamas and PA operate as power players, and only decisive action garners respect and compliance. Syria, the Druze, and Israel’s Strategic Posture Recent attacks on Syria’s Druze drew a strong Israeli response, cementing Israel’s role as a protector of Druze communities. Israel’s reaction contrasted with its silence on atrocities against the Alawites, underscoring its selective engagement based on alliances and strategic interests. The conversation also referenced differences between various Muslim sects and longstanding historical grievances. Western Misunderstandings U.S. and Western policy tends to prioritize democratic elections and individual rights, which do not align with the group-based logic of Middle Eastern societies. Examples include the unintended consequences of forcing elections in Gaza (leading to Hamas’s rise) and undermining allies through misplaced idealism (Jimmy Carter and the Shah of Iran). American notions of goodwill are seen as weakness in the region. Solution Framework Peace in the region comes through strength, respect for local power structures, and enforcing order rather than imposing Western democratic ideals. Israel can work with tribal structures to create security and economic cooperation, as long as it respects their methods and provides firm support. Recommendations for Further Reading  Professor Rhode highly recommends Bernard Lewis’s work, especially “The Return of Islam” (Commentary, 1976), for understanding the deeper cultural and ideological foundations of Middle Eastern thinking. He also wrote a short book, “Modern Islamic Warfare,” available for free at harold-rode.com. The webinar underscored the need for nuanced understanding of local structures, the power of tribal and group loyalties, and the role of strength in fostering stability in the Middle East. The recap of this webinar was generated by computer. 

Kurdish people span a broad area in the Middle East – across parts of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. They constitute one of the largest ethnic groups without a state of their own, but have worked with the US – and with Israel – to create stability and security in the places they live. A longtime supporter of the Kurdish people, BG Audino recently spent time traveling in the region. Join us as he explains how American interests can be enhanced by cooperative relations.

The American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, coordinated with Israel, has changed the trajectory of the Middle East. What happened? Why now? What is next? Winners and losers We will have two programs this week – and that probably is not enough. Join us Monday for a conversation with Dr. Stephen Bryen, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense and an expert in security strategy and technology.

JPC Senior Director Shoshana Bryen was pleased to be invited to interview FDD President Clifford May at the Republican Jewish Coalition leadership meeting in Washington, DC on June 12, 2025. Because it preempted our usual podcast, we’re happy to bring you a video of their conversation..

“If you ask yourself what you would have done if you had lived in Nazi Germany during the Holocaust, the answer is clear. What you do today, when antisemitism is again raising its ugly head across the world, is what you would have done then if you had been alive during the Holocaust.” Tomas Sandell, founder of the European Coalition for Israel in 2003, summarizes the battle. “It is pivotal that we do not give up our streets in Europe to those groups who call for the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews.” Is the battle being won or lost? Join us for an important conversation.

President Donald Trump changed the format for American policy in the Middle East. He announced the capitulation of the Houthis in their war against AMERICAN shipping; invited Qatar and Syria – terror ties notwithstanding – to join the Abraham Accords along with Saudi Arabia; and made (limited) overtures to Iran. At the same time, he has ensured American weapons deliveries in full to Israel; has not commented on Israel’s new offensive in Gaza; and is participating with Israel in the movement of food. Israel remains firmly ensconced in USCENTCOM. How is the US-Israel relationship changing? Join us for a conversation with Dr. David Wurmser, a Senior Analyst for Middle East Affairs at the Center for Security Policy as he tracks the shifts and their implications for Israel and for regional security.

Pundits like left-wing journalist Glenn Greenwald portray pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas campus activists as underdogs battling Zionist-dominated university bosses. But when you listen to someone like Northeastern U. Professor of Political Science Max  Abrahms, who has had a front-row seat to observe the raw anti-Semitism that has flourished on US campuses since October 7, it seems clear that Greenwald and Company are peddling their own version of the Big Lie. Aside from a few schools like Brandeis University  and Yeshiva University, scholars who are sympathetic to Israel are marginalized and forced into the shadows virtually everywhere else. Abrahms told a Jewish Policy Center webinar on Thursday. Professors say privately that to be a faculty member, you need to be  “anti-Zionist” and that if you dissent from this orthodoxy your career advancement opportunities will be limited. Abrahms said  he supports the Trump administration’s efforts to use the threat of withholding federal aid to force schools to expel students who engage in violence and intimidation. But he expressed concern that the hostility to Israel is so ingrained that the federal pressure may not be sufficient to bring about reform. Abrahms believes that  university administrators, not students, are chiefly to blame for the situation, calling them “an integral part of what’s wrong.” These administrators, he said, “create this atmosphere” where anti-Semitism can flourish. So-called Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) plans aimed at helping victimized groups are “inherently anti-Semitic,” according to Abrahms. He said that when he attempted to meet the chief diversity officer at his own school, he was informed that they do not view anti-Semitism “as one of the things they are fighting.” Later, Abrahms learned that the head of the school’s Chabad organization had been told the same thing. He believes that, by leveraging their financial support,  Jewish donors could create a powerful incentive for reform. According to Abrahms, professors sympathetic to Zionism currently  “face an incentive system geared toward keeping them silent.” Donors “need to place conditions” on academic institutions they support, Abrahms said.   “That’s the only way to change things.”

In his new book, “Lawless: The Miseducation of America’s Elites,”   Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Ilya Shapiro shows how  US higher education has been transformed away from a place where students  learn  how  to think critically, make cogent arguments and respect viewpoints that are different from their own. Today, however, those schools  are more like indoctrination factories where students are taught to see themselves as  victims in need of “safe spaces” and entitled to respond violently if they are forced to confront people who dissent from progressive orthodoxy. Recently, we’ve witnessed disturbing scenes where Jewish students are terrorized by Hamas backers at Columbia University and hundreds of other colleges across the United States,  At Stanford U.,  a mob of students –  egged on by the school’s  associate dean for diversity, equity, and inclusion – blocked US Appeals Court Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan from speaking. At Yale, the war against free speech became so disruptive that more than a dozen federal judges announced they would no longer hire law clerks from that school. Most university administrators are “spineless cowards,”  Shapiro told a Jewish Policy Center webinar on Thursday. He added that these administrators opt to “capitulate to the mob” rather than lose opportunities to move up the career ladder in academia. Shapiro emphasized that while hate speech is protected by the First Amendment, terroristic threats and physical violence are not.  He noted in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis was able to show that Students for Justice in Palestine,  a group that has been linked to much of the virulent pro-Hamas, anti-Semitic activity on US campuses in recent years, has provided “material support” to a terrorist organization, Hamas in violation of the Florida and US codes.. As a result, SJP has been disestablished on Florida public university campuses.

The first round of revenge killings in Syria appears to be over. Don’t mistake that for calm. Ankara and Damascus are negotiating a “peace treaty” that would allow Turkish troops to operate inside the country, and Turkey has begun efforts to take control of an airbase known as T-4, including the deployment of air defenses. Turkey claims it is “stabilizing” Syria. Israel has a different view. Join us for a discussion with Hazem Alghabra, a former US State Department official with roots in Syria. We will look at Turkey’s increasing control in Syria, the Syrian government’s acquiescence, and the Israeli government’s response. And there is always time for Iran.