As crisis engulfs Israel, Biden’s words go only so far

The political crisis engulfing Israel is exposing the limits of American influence on the country — limits that are, to some degree, self-imposed.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s effort to overhaul Israel’s judiciary is the most direct cause of the recent chaos — prompting huge protests and strikes, with even Israeli military members speaking out in opposition.

Netanyahu’s goal: make changes to Israel’s judicial system that would, among other things, let Israeli lawmakers override court rulings — a move that critics fear will badly damage Israeli democracy.

Over the weekend, Netanyahu fired his defense minister for opposing the overhaul — sparking more protests and exposing cracks in the ruling coalition. On Monday, as more coalition members reportedly threatened to quit, Netanyahu announced he was putting the overhaul on hold and would seek a compromise measure.

Throughout the crisis, whose roots stretch back months, President Joe Biden and his aides tried to strike a balance with Israel: Keeping appeals and criticisms largely private, but going public on occasion with carefully worded statements designed to pressure Netanyahu to back off the overhaul plan. But those U.S. appeals didn’t seem to do the trick. Internal Israeli pressure has clearly been far more powerful.

The big question now is how much influence the United States still has with Netanyahu and what level of pressure it’s willing to apply when Netanyahu or his party take future destabilizing actions.

So the crisis is all about the judicial reform?

No. Netanyahu returned to power late last year— after the latest in a series of seemingly endless elections — by aligning himself with extreme right-wing figures, some of whom have racist, misogynist and homophobic views.

This has alarmed more moderate and left-leaning Israelis, whose political power is limited. Many worry that the far-right coalition now in charge of the country — some members of whom have extreme religious views — will undermine secular Israelis’ rights, not to mention those of Israeli Arabs, Palestinians and others.

To top it off, many of his critics suspect that the main reason Netanyahu is pushing the judicial overhaul and other initiatives desired by his far-right partners is so that they will ultimately protect him from prosecution in Israeli courts, where he’s facing corruption charges.

How are Biden and his aides reacting to all this?

Very, very cautiously.

For the most part, Biden administration officials have tried to keep their conversations with the Israelis private, and, even then, they tend to say things in carefully worded ways.

The administration has — often in a coded manner — warned Netanyahu that he needs to protect Israeli democracy. The administration also has stressed its support for LGBTQ rights and Palestinian rights in ways designed to signal to Netanyahu that he should rein in his extremist allies.

Administration officials have said they will hold Netanyahu responsible for his coalition, pointing out that he’s insisted he’s the one in charge. And top administration officials have refused to meet with far-right figures surrounding the Israeli prime minister.

But the Biden administration also insists that its commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad. The president has long said he will not impose conditions on the billions of dollars in security aid the U.S. provides to Israel, and there’s no sign he’s changed his mind about that.

While the administration insists that it does have some leverage over Israel — such as assisting it against attacks at the United Nations or helping it pursue deeper cooperation with some Arab states — the reality is that it has largely stuck to rhetoric as its main weapon.

Is it working?

Not really.

Just days ago, Biden spoke to Netanyahu, and the White House readout of the call emphasized that Biden wanted Israel to find a compromise on the judicial reform issue because it’s critical to safeguarding Israeli democracy.

“Democratic societies are strengthened by genuine checks and balances, and that fundamental changes should be pursued with the broadest possible base of popular support,” the readout said.

It was an unusually frank call, the readout suggested, especially given the usual niceties involved in the relationship. But in the days after, there was no sign that Netanyahu had taken Biden’s warnings to heart.

The Israeli leader proceeded ahead with the judicial reform plans. It wasn’t until Netanyahu’s coalition started to crack amid popular pressure that he began to rethink his stance this past weekend.

What factors must Biden consider when dealing with Israel?

First, there’s the pure national security aspect. Israel is a critical partner to the United States in the Middle East, especially when it comes to intelligence sharing about the various players in the region.

This is especially important in regard to Iran, a longtime U.S. and Israeli adversary with a nuclear program.

Second, there’s just a lot of history. The United States has always been a stalwart partner to Israel ever since it was created as a homeland for the Jewish people fleeing persecution in Europe and beyond.

Biden has been, for decades, a champion of Israel. He genuinely loves the country and the many successes it has achieved in its short existence.

Biden has often touted his friendship with Netanyahu, even when the latter has tested that friendship.

Israel also is a rare democracy in the Middle East. Many U.S. officials also want to keep good ties with Israel in part to resolve the lingering Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has left the Palestinian people in misery for decades.

Third, there’s the question of how things could play out in America’s 2024 presidential campaign.

For many years, there was broad bipartisan support for Israel in the United States, and any president who criticized the country risked being attacked by members of his own party. This is changing, somewhat.

Generally speaking, Democrats are still strong supporters of Israel. But there has been growing worry in recent years among Democrats about Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

Netanyahu’s wholehearted embrace of former President Donald Trump angered many Democrats. His new government’s make-up also has alarmed even some of his strongest Democratic backers, suggesting Biden could feel pressure from his party to be tougher on Israel going forward.

Is the calculus different for the GOP?

Pro-Israel organizations are strong and politically active, and they command significant support from evangelical Christians in particular — an important Republican base.

In a sign of how strident the GOP support is for Israel, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell recently told Axios that Washington shouldn’t weigh in on the judicial overhaul plan, calling it an Israel internal matter.

Republicans eyeing the White House already are trying to prove their pro-Israel bona fides.

Some, such as former Trump administration Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, won’t say if they support a future state for Palestinians, for instance. Nikki Haley, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has touted her many efforts to protect Israel at the world body.

But there are signs that Netanyahu’s overhaul plan goes too far for even some of Israel’s biggest supporters on the American right. Former Trump administration ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, is among those who’ve reportedly voiced concerns.

How much does the U.S. really care about the Middle East right now, given threats from Russia and China?

It still cares a lot.

The United States has military bases in the Middle East, and the region remains a key source of oil and gas for the world — one even more critical given the damage Russia’s war in Ukraine has done to energy markets.

Without question, the Biden administration believes the top threat to America’s long-term global power is China. But China — as well as Russia — is trying to gain influence in the Middle East amid perceptions that the United States is backing away from the region. That means the competition with those two countries will include the arena of the Middle East.

For the Biden administration, one key goal is to push for a more peaceful Middle East, with the idea that a more stable Middle East means the United States can focus more on the grander challenges posed by China and Russia.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/nC87Vrj
via IFTTT

Read More

ISIS Isn’t Dead, It’s Just Detained.

When ISIS’s territorial “state” was dealt its final defeat four years ago in eastern Syria, the world breathed a sigh of relief. For years, ISIS had terrified the globe. Using slick propaganda, the terror group had recruited as many as 50,000 foreign fighters from dozens of countries. ISIS’s declaration of an Islamic “caliphate” saw it transform into a worldwide movement, with activities on every continent. And when the U.S. led an international coalition to confront it, ISIS triggered a global campaign of retaliatory terrorist attacks that transformed international security.

In the years since its territorial defeat, a small force of 900 U.S. troops has remained in northeastern Syria to degrade ISIS’s insurgency, alongside a local partner, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who occupy a third of the country, counter to the agenda of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. To a large extent, that counterterrorism mission is succeeding.

On a recent visit to the area alongside U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) Commander Gen. Erik Kurilla, I saw first-hand the vital and sustainable role being played by U.S. troops, whose support to SDF operations is the glue holding together the only meaningful counter to ISIS’s desire to resurge once again. From running an extensive aerial surveillance network, to coordinating the SDF’s more than 100,000 fighters and facilitating civilian aid, stabilization and tribal engagement, these troops are indispensable. U.S. helicopters also medevac injured SDF personnel, as we saw after ISIS militants ambushed an SDF patrol, critically injuring one SDF fighter.

While the U.S. troop presence exists explicitly and only to combat ISIS, during my visit the constant threat of attack by Iranian-sponsored militias was palpable. Forces dedicated to coordinating U.S. drones flying over Syrian skies and to radar and air defense systems deployed in U.S. bases in Syria were laser-focused on the array of Iranian-produced drones known to have been used for kamikaze-style attacks on U.S. forces in the region. As CENTCOM has made clear, countering ISIS and preventing its resurgence is the second most vital U.S. priority in the Middle East, but the first is facing down the threats posed by a hostile Iran.

While an ISIS attack during our visit underlined the terror group’s persistent threat, the reason for such a heightened awareness of Iranian threats was revealed on March 23, when an Iranian suicide drone hit a U.S. base in eastern Syria, killing a contractor and wounding five U.S. servicemembers. Such tit-for-tat incidents are far from new — this was the 79th Iranian attack on U.S. forces in Syria since January 2021 — but the deadly nature of the attack was extremely rare. The U.S. has not suffered a combat fatality in Syria for years. Retaliatory U.S. airstrikes on Iran-linked positions in the area followed just hours later, but it is unclear if they would be sufficient to deter further attacks. That Russia has markedly escalated its flight of fighter jets into U.S.-controlled airspace in northeastern Syria has complicated things further. One such ‘overflight’ occurred during our visit to the area — no coincidence given the presence of CENTCOM’s leadership.

Yet despite the challenges from malign states, the fight against ISIS remains the utmost priority. Since late 2019, three successive ISIS leaders have been killed on Syrian soil, along with dozens of senior and mid-level commanders. In terms of counterterrorism, we are unquestionably degrading ISIS. However, the terror group has one invaluable advantage on its side: the remnants of its “state” in the former of its former residents. In the final days of the fateful battle against ISIS’s last stand at al-Baghuz in March 2019, streams of ISIS fighters and family members were captured. Today, more than 10,000 battle-hardened ISIS militants languish in 26 makeshift SDF prisons and a further 54,000 women and children reside in secured camps.

This detainee crisis represents a humanitarian and security challenge the likes of which we have never faced before. On the ground, the scale is staggering, as is the profound security threats associated with it. “When you speak with residents, when you speak with the SDF securing the sites, when you speak with camp administration officials, you get a real sense of looming danger,” CENTCOM’s Kurilla told me after Blackhawk helicopters took us to the largest of the camps, al-Hol. “We have to have a real sense of urgency to address this problem through repatriation, rehabilitation, and reintegration,” Kurilla told me. “This requires all arms of the U.S. government; it requires the international community.”

The scale of this detainee crisis is unprecedented. Twenty-one years ago, 780 terrorism suspects were rendered to Guantanamo Bay, a self-contained detention facility on an isolated island thousands of miles from active conflict. Twenty-one years later, 31 remain there, despite concerted efforts by successive U.S. administrations to prosecute and repatriate prisoners. The ISIS fighters alone, numbering 10,000, would fill 13 Guantanamos at its original capacity. In northeast Syria, by contrast, we are dealing with a total of nearly 65,000 people from at least 55 countries, held in makeshift prisons and vast camps, amid ongoing civil conflict and an ISIS insurgency.

It is hard to understate the mammoth challenge associated with anything close to a resolution here. ISIS literally has an army in prisons — 10,000 in Syria and 20,000 next door in Iraq. At least 5,000 of ISIS’s most dangerous and committed fighters currently reside in Ghweiran prison in Hasakah, northeastern Syria. The facility, a former school, is administered by our SDF partners and its defenses paid for by the U.S. and coalition allies. During a visit to the prison, I heard of a just-foiled ISIS prison break coordinated by an Iraqi leader inside and operatives outside.

Prison breaks are part of ISIS’s DNA. They were the key to its dramatic resurgence in 2014. In January 2022, ISIS launched a massive attack on Ghweiran prison, ramming several vehicles rigged with explosives into exterior walls, then driving pick-up trucks full of weapons into the facility to arm prisoners. The assault had been coordinated by inmates and ISIS operatives on the outside. Some local prison guards had almost certainly been coerced into facilitating the initial attack. Ultimately, the incident triggered a 10-day battle that drew in U.S. and U.K. special forces and left more than 500 people dead. British government money has since reinforced the prison’s defenses, but ISIS is clearly not deterred.

But ISIS is not only interested in freeing its fighters — it is also determined to free the 50,000 women and children held in al-Hol camp, 40 kilometers away. Multiple major ISIS plots to attack al-Hol have been foiled in recent months. As we learned, SDF guards there have begun receiving ISIS threats by cell phone and now only enter the camp in U.S.-provided Bearcat armored vehicles. During a brief foray into the camp, we were flanked by multiple teams of U.S. special forces, American-operated Bradley fighting vehicles stood at every corner and U.S. drones and helicopters were in the sky above us.

The presence of more than 25,000 children in al-Hol is a humanitarian travesty and a ticking time bomb. In September, the SDF completed a weeks-long clearing operation in al-Hol that captured 300 ISIS operatives who had been living among the women and children along with weapons and explosives. A rocket-propelled grenade attack within the camp killed two SDF personnel, but equally concerning was the discovery of several “ISIS schools,” along with photo and video footage showing young children being taught ISIS’s ideology and support for violence and terrorism. The evidence we were shown from within the camp was similar to that created by ISIS’s propaganda outfits at the height of the terror group’s power. For CENTCOM, this is ISIS’s “next generation,” to complement its “army in detention.”

The only resolution to this detainee crisis is returning the men, women and children to their countries of origin for prosecution or rehabilitation and reintegration. Logistically, the challenge here is daunting. The vast majority of the nearly 50,000 women and children are from Iraq and Syria. To date, Iraq has engaged in an impressive returns process, but even so, it will take at least six years to complete. Of the roughly 12,000 Syrians, almost all are from regime-controlled areas, which precludes returns altogether. Following a concerted U.S. diplomatic push, repatriation of third country nationals achieved considerable momentum in 2022, but even so, only 1 percent were actually transferred home. It can take as long as a year to complete a single repatriation case and when it comes to the 10,000 male prisoners, there is no international willingness to repatriate at all.

If the situation remains the same, it will take at least 30 years to return the women and children alone. But U.S. troops, key to containing ISIS and securing the facilities, will almost certainly not be in Syria anywhere near that long due to slowly building pressures at home to disengage from conflicts in the region. Whenever the troops do leave, all hell will break loose. The Syrian regime has an unspeakable track record when it comes to ISIS, having all-but-ignored its rise since 2011. Even earlier, from 2003 to 2010, Assad’s regime actively supported ISIS’s insurgency against U.S. and allied forces in Iraq, providing training, intelligence and financial support, as well as facilitating the arrival of more than 90 percent of its suicide bombers across Syrian territory.

Failing to deal with this detainee crisis is a dream scenario for ISIS. This is a priority for the U.S., with the State Department now convening an inter-agency working group dedicated to the issue. But this is not nearly enough. A major international diplomatic mobilization is required to elevate the response to this challenge to the level required.

When ISIS marched into Mosul and across Iraq and Syria in 2014, the biggest international coalition in modern history took form to intervene. A similar effort is required now. If not, a catastrophic ISIS resurgence is just a matter of time.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/Q5CROxg
via IFTTT

Read More

European lawmakers cling to TikTok for Gen Z votes

Europe's politicians and groups aren't ready to give up on TikTok yet.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/OkZYK1R
via IFTTT

Read More

Israel's leaders must find compromise on legislation that is tearing country apart, White House says

The White House on Sunday urged “Israeli leaders to find a compromise as soon as possible,” as widespread unrest broke out in Israel after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired his defense minister for objecting to judicial reforms that Netanyahu is seeking to enact.

“We are deeply concerned by today’s developments out of Israel, which further underscore the urgent need for compromise,” National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson said in a statement. “As the President recently discussed with Prime Minister Netanyahu, democratic values have always been, and must remain, a hallmark of the U.S.-Israel relationship.”

The turmoil started when Netanyahu, newly returned to office after another in a seemingly endless series of extremely close elections, announced a plan to overhaul the judiciary. Netanyahu’s package of judicial changes would essentially strip Israel’s top court of its independence and defang the nation’s courts by making it possible for the government to pass legislation that can’t be reviewed by judges.

Protests against the measures have been widespread for weeks. Opponents have characterized the plans as anti-democratic and a boost to Netanyahu’s power at a time when the prime minister himself is facing criminal charges.

“It’s an attack on the very soul and nature of our democracy,” former Prime Minister Ehud Barak said earlier this month. Barak urged Israelis to resort to mass civil disobedience to block the judicial reforms.

On Saturday, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant spoke out against the legislation; on Sunday, Netanyahu fired him, saying, “We must all stand strong against refusal.”

Protests against Gallant’s firing immediately broke out in Israel’s major cities. The Associated Press reported that “protesters in Tel Aviv blocked a main highway and lit large bonfires, while police scuffled with protesters who gathered outside Netanyahu’s private home in Jerusalem.”

The White House statement said that disagreements over Netanyahu’s current policies would not disrupt the U.S.-Israel relationship, which traditionally has been very close.

“U.S. support for Israel’s security and democracy remains ironclad,” the statement said.

Given America’s close relationship with Israel, and the Biden administration’s general hesitation to openly criticize such an important Middle Eastern ally, the White House statement on Sunday was relatively pointed.

The administration has known for a while that this Netanyahu-led coalition is an unusually extreme one, but it had hoped that Netanyahu could keep it in line. The prime minister had insisted that the far-right members of his coalition were joining him and not the other way around, and that he was in charge.

As a result, Biden administration officials had said they intended to hold him responsible for whatever happened. But they were also keenly aware of the many factors that Netanyahu is juggling, including his desire to avoid further prosecution on corruption charges — one of the reasons he is believed to have acquiesced to some of the demands of his coalition partners.

When asked on Sunday whether the administration had any immediate Israel-related plans beyond issuing the statement, U.S. officials did not offer comment.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/zITqfO5
via IFTTT

Read More

Harris seeks to reset U.S.-Africa relations on 3-nation tour

ACCRA, Ghana — For Vice President Kamala Harris' first trip in office to Africa, the goal is nothing less than the resetting of relations between the United States and the countries she's scheduled to visit.

Fearful that China has gained a huge economic foothold on the continent, the Biden administration is trying to not just loosen that grip but encourage more American businesses to invest in African nations.

Harris’ arrival Sunday marks the latest, most high-profile effort to achieve those ends. She is the fifth top Biden administration official to visit Africa this year: U.N. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen came in January, first lady Jill Biden visited in February and Secretary of State Antony Blinken made the trip earlier this month. President Joe Biden plans to visit later in the year.

In Ghana, Harris’ primary focus is on elevating the nation’s youth — and she noted the median age of Africans is 19.

“What that tells us about the growth, of opportunities, of innovation, possibilities — I see in all of that, great opportunity not only for people of this continent, but for people of the world,” Harris told the crowd of dignitaries, dancers, drummers and schoolchildren who had greeted her.

But Ghana isn’t her only audience. Harris also will spend time in Tanzania and Zambia over her seven days on the continent. She’ll hold bilateral meetings with the leaders of each of the three nations, visit Ghana’s Cape Coast slave castle and make announcements about public-private sector investments.

The trip is intended to help make good on the administration’s commitments from December at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit.

But for Harris, the first Black U.S. vice president, it also carries especially high stakes. Her task will be to convince the African nations that the United States wants to truly invest in the future of the countries here and help change the narrative for Americans and encourage more business investments.

For decades, the perception of the U.S. has been that it treats African countries like charity cases, according to several regional experts. That was exacerbated during the Trump administration, which largely ignored the continent or reportedly disparaged it. Former President Donald Trump, in a 2018 meeting, referred to some African nations as “shithole countries.” At the same time, China enhanced its investments in Africa, helping to build roads and other infrastructure projects and creating firmer economic and political relations.

“Washington is playing catch up in Africa,” said Cameron Hudson, a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Africa Program. “With all of the business investment that the Chinese have made comes a lot of leverage and political influence in those countries. It's not just that they're making money there. It's that they now have skin in the game in Africa in ways that we don't. And that gives them leverage that we don't have.”

But experts say the Biden administration has an opportunity to now compete with China as more African leaders see their relationship with China as “a new form of exploitation,” said J. Peter Pham, the former special envoy for the Sahel region of Africa during the Trump administration.

“A lot of Africans have woken up to realize how often in these large construction projects, infrastructure … they don't employ Africans. They even ship in their own labor oftentimes,” Pham said.

The Biden administration has tried to paint its Africa policy as one based in long-lasting relationships instead of a larger move to counter China and choke off economic support for Russia. But administration officials acknowledge that those global rivals do factor into their view of current U.S.-Africa policy.

“Obviously, we can’t ignore the current geopolitical moment. It's no secret that we are engaged in competition with China. And we've said very clearly we intend to outcompete China in the long term,” said a senior administration official who spoke on a call with reporters ahead of the trip.

Harris’ visit, the official added, is intended to prove that America has “an affirmative agenda” for the continent, one that will change the tenor of the relationship.

In her remarks to the African Leaders Summit in December, Harris previewed the message she’s expected to lean on over the next week: That the administration would create partnerships across the continent “grounded in candor, openness, inclusiveness, shared interests, and mutual benefits. And overall, our administration will be guided not by what we can do for Africa, but what we can do with Africa.”

Part of Harris’ task will be to shift how Americans view the continent from one that centers on civil war, human rights abuses and coup d’etats.

“American businesses do not see Africa in economic terms. They don't see African countries as investment opportunities. It's the first step to shift the rhetoric from a focus on corruption and human rights and security to business opportunities,” said Amaka Anku, who heads up the Africa practice at the Eurasia group.

“But I think that the challenge is not just convincing Africans that Africa's economic transformation is in the American interest. It's also convincing Americans. Otherwise it’s just rhetoric.”

To that point, Harris on Wednesday will announce continent-wide public and private sector investment opportunities aimed at the economic empowerment of women. She’ll also convene business and philanthropic leaders from African countries and the U.S. to “digital and financial inclusion on the continent,” meeting with creatives, including heading to a local music studio.

“I also look forward to meeting with entrepreneurs, and artists and students and farmers to witness firsthand the extraordinary innovation that is happening on this continent and inspiring the world,” Harris said during her welcome ceremony.

Experts say Harris isn’t going to erase decades of a lack of partnership with African countries in one week-long trip, the leaders on the continent are going to be watching for cues that the U.S. is more than just talk this time around. And the administration is running out of time.

“We're going to quickly wear out our welcome, if we you know, and you know, these trips are great, but they're enormously burdensome to the host countries. And we have processions of people coming in regularly and not one of them brings a real deal with them. After a while, it can get a little tiresome,” Pham said.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/69ujRAp
via IFTTT

Read More

Is ‘David’ porn? See for yourself, Italians ask Florida parents

ROME — The Florence museum housing Michelangelo’s Renaissance masterpiece the “David” invited parents and students from a Florida charter school to visit after complaints about a lesson featuring the statue forced the principal to resign.

Florence Mayor Dario Nardella also tweeted an invitation for the principal to visit so he can personally honor her. Confusing art with pornography was “ridiculous,” Nardella said.

The incredulous Italian response highlights how the U.S. culture wars are often perceived in Europe, where despite a rise in right-wing sentiment and governance, the Renaissance and its masterpieces, even its naked ones, are generally free of controversy.

But the board of the Tallahassee Classical School pressured Principal Hope Carrasquilla to resign last week after an image of the “David” was shown to a sixth-grade art class. The school has a policy requiring parents to be notified in advance about “controversial” topics being taught.

Carrasquilla believes the board targeted her after three parents complained about a lesson including a photo of the “David,” a 17-foot nude marble sculpture dating from 1504. The work, considered a masterpiece of the Italian Renaissance, depicts the Biblical David going to fight Goliath armed only with his faith in God.

Carrasquilla has said two parents complained because they weren’t notified in advance that a nude would be shown, while a third called the iconic statue pornographic.

Carrasquilla said in a phone interview Sunday that she is “very honored” by the invitations to Italy and she may accept.

“I am totally, like, wow,” Carasquilla said. “I’ve been to Florence before and have seen the ‘David’ up close and in person, but I would love to go and be a guest of the mayor.”

Cecilie Hollberg, director of the Galleria dell’Accademia, where the “David” resides, expressed astonishment at the controversy.

“To think that ‘David’ could be pornographic means truly not understanding the contents of the Bible, not understanding Western culture and not understanding Renaissance art,” Hollberg said in a telephone interview.

She invited the principal, school board, parents and student body to view the “purity” of the statue.

Tallahassee Classical is a charter school. While it is taxpayer-funded and tuition-free, it operates almost entirely independently of the local school district and is sought out by parents seeking an alternative to the public school curriculum.

About 400 students from kindergarten through 12th grade attend the three-year-old institution, which is now on its third principal. It follows a curriculum designed by Hillsdale College, a conservative Christian school in Michigan frequently consulted by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on educational issues.

Barney Bishop, chairman of Tallahassee Classical’s school board, has told reporters that while the photo of the statue played a part in Carrasquilla’s ouster, it wasn’t the only factor. He has declined to elaborate, while defending the decision.

“Parents are entitled to know anytime their child is being taught a controversial topic and picture,” Bishop said in an interview with Slate online magazine.

Several parents and teachers plan to protest Carrasquilla’s ouster at Monday night’s school board meeting, but Carrasquilla said she isn’t sure she would take the job back even if it were offered.

“There’s been such controversy and such upheaval,” she said. “I would really have to consider, ‘Is this truly what is best?’”

Marla Stone, head of humanities studies at the American Academy in Rome, said the Florida incident was another episode in escalating U.S. culture wars and questioned how the statue could be considered so controversial as to warrant a prior warning.

“What we have here is a moral crusade against the body, sexuality, and gender expression and an ignorance of history,” Stone said in an email. “The incident is about fear, fear of beauty, of difference, and of the possibilities embedded in art.”

Michelangelo Buonarroti sculpted the “David” from 1501 to 1504 after being commissioned by the Cathedral of Florence. The statue is the showpiece of the Accademia, and helps draw 1.7 million visitors each year to the museum.

“It is incredibly sought-after by Americans who want to do selfies and enjoy the beauty of this statue,” Director Hollberg said.

The museum, like many in Europe, is free for student groups. There was no indication that any trip would be subsidized by the city or museum.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/3HaB7sj
via IFTTT

Read More

Netanyahu fires defense minister for urging halt to overhaul

JERUSALEM — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired his defense minister on Sunday, a day after Yoav Gallant called for a halt to the planned overhaul of Israel’s judiciary that has fiercely divided the country.

Netanyahu’s office did not provide further details. The move signals the prime minister will move ahead this week with plans to overhaul Israel’s judiciary, which has sparked widespread opposition. Tens of thousands of protesters have taken to the streets, military and business leaders have spoken out against it and leading allies of Israel have voiced concerns.

Gallant, a former army general, is a senior member of Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party. On Saturday, he called for a pause in the controversial legislation until after next month’s Independence Day holidays, citing the rift’s threat to Israel’s national security.

Meanwhile, an Israeli good governance group on Sunday asked the country’s Supreme Court to punish Netanyahu for allegedly violating a conflict of interest agreement meant to prevent him from dealing with the country’s judiciary while he is on trial for corruption.

The request by the Movement for Quality Government in Israel intensifies a brewing showdown between Netanyahu’s government and the judiciary,

Netanyahu’s government is pushing ahead for a parliamentary vote this week on a centerpiece of the overhaul — a law that would give the governing coalition the final say over all judicial appointments.

Outgoing Defense Minister Gallant was the first to break ranks late Saturday by calling for the legislation to be frozen. Gallant cited the turmoil in the ranks of the military over the plan. But it was unclear whether others would follow him.

On Sunday, the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, a fierce opponent of the overhaul, asked the court to force Netanyahu to obey the law and sanction him either with a fine or prison time for not doing so. It said he was not above the law.

“A prime minister who doesn’t obey the court and the provisions of the law is privileged and an anarchist,” said Eliad Shraga, the head of the group, echoing language used by Netanyahu and his allies against protesters opposed to the overhaul. “The prime minister will be forced to bow his head before the law and comply with the provisions of the law.”

The prime minister responded saying the appeal should be dismissed and said that the Supreme Court didn’t have grounds to intervene.

Netanyahu is barred by the country’s attorney general from directly dealing with his government’s plan to overhaul the judiciary, based on a conflict of interest agreement he is bound to, and which the Supreme Court acknowledged in a ruling over Netanyahu’s fitness to serve while on trial for corruption. Instead, Justice Minister Yariv Levin, a close confidant of Netanyahu, is spearheading the overhaul.

But on Thursday, after parliament passed a law making it harder to remove a sitting prime minister, Netanyahu said he was unshackled from the attorney general’s decision and vowed to wade into the crisis and “mend the rift” in the nation. That declaration prompted the attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, to warn that Netanyahu was breaking his conflict of interest agreement by entering the fray.

The fast-paced legal and political developments have catapulted Israel into uncharted territory and toward a burgeoning constitutional crisis, said Guy Lurie, a research fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, a Jerusalem think tank.

“We are at the start of a constitutional crisis in the sense that there is a disagreement over the source of authority and legitimacy of different governing bodies,” he said.

If Netanyahu continues to intervene in the overhaul, Baharav-Miara could launch an investigation into whether he violated the conflict of interest agreement, which could lead to additional charges against him, Lurie said. He added that the uncertainty of the events made him unsure of how they were likely to unfold.

It is also unclear how the court, which is at the center of the divide surrounding the overhaul, will treat the request to sanction Netanyahu. The Movement for Quality Government said the court had given Netanyahu and the attorney general a week to respond.

Netanyahu is on trial for charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate affairs involving wealthy associates and powerful media moguls. He denies wrongdoing and dismisses critics who say he will try to seek an escape route from the charges through the legal overhaul.

The overhaul will give the government control over who becomes a judge and limit judicial review over government decisions and legislation. Netanyahu and his allies say the plan will restore a balance between the judicial and executive branches and rein in what they see as an interventionist court with liberal sympathies.

Critics say the plan upends Israel’s fragile system of checks and balances and pushes Israel down a path toward autocracy.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/q5D46bc
via IFTTT

Read More