Insights, analysis and must reads from CNN's Fareed Zakaria and the Global Public Square team, compiled by Global Briefing editor Chris Good Seeing this newsletter as a forward? Sign up here. April 11, 2024 | |
|
Netanyahu Faces Anger in the Streets |
In different ways and by different accounts, Israel is rife with tension. After a suspected Israeli strike killed Iranian military commanders in Damascus, Sherri Mandell writes for The Times of Israel of fearing an Iranian retaliatory missile—and calling her children to ask how much she should worry. Domestic divisions have also returned. Before Hamas' Oct. 7 massacres and Israel's reprisal campaign in Gaza, massive protests had filled Israeli streets on weekends throughout last year, as demonstrators—described largely as liberal-democratic, secular Israeli Jews—railed against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's push to reform the judiciary. Now, protests have returned in force—this time over the security failure on Oct. 7, Netanyahu's handling of the war, and the unfulfilled imperative to bring home all Israeli hostages. At the end of March, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem witnessed the largest protests seen in Israel since the Gaza war began. The Atlantic's Graeme Wood talks with protesters and finds little anger over humanitarian casualties in Gaza but much ire at Netanyahu and his government—for failing to prevent the Oct. 7 attack and for resisting a ceasefire deal with Hamas in exchange for Israeli hostages. "The crowds had chosen their villain," Wood writes. "Netanyahu had made everything worse, they said. He presided over the original intelligence failure of October 7—an error that, all by itself, makes him the worst leader in Israel's history." As Israel's far right resists cutting a deal with Hamas, and in some cases has evinced a vision of postwar Gaza devoid of Palestinians, Wood continues: "It is one thing to refuse to negotiate with extremists because they are extremists. It is another to refuse to negotiate with them because you are extreme too. The protesters have come to suspect that the latter has been holding up the hostage return as much as the former—and that they, as Israelis, cannot change Hamas, but they might be able to change their own government." |
|
|
… and the Potential 'Earthquake' of Ultra-Orthodox Conscription |
Given domestic opposition to Netanyahu and criticism from the US, the Middle East Institute's Nimrod Goren wrote recently: "The factors that could spark early elections in Israel are multiplying and growing stronger." Adding to that mix is a looming decision concerning the conscription of Israel's ultra-Orthodox Jews, also referred to as Haredim, who are exempt from mandatory military service. (Ultra-Orthodox men must study in yeshivas to be exempted.) In 2018, Israel's Supreme Court found the policy discriminatory; facing a March deadline to come up with a plan, Netanyahu advanced one to gradually increase ultra-Orthodox military service; the Supreme Court will hear the matter on June 2. As The Guardian's Lorenzo Tondo and Quique Kierszenbaum report, the ultra-Orthodox remain fiercely opposed to being conscripted. At The Atlantic, Yair Rosenberg writes: "The Israeli public—and especially the Israeli right—was previously willing to look the other way on Haredi enlistment to advance other political priorities. But now, in a time of perceived existential conflict, Haredi enlistment has become a prime concern. … A long-standing fault line in Israeli society has now produced an earthquake." It's a "pressure point" for Netanyahu in particular, as the ultra-Orthodox are an important part of his governing coalition. Now, "tensions have exploded into the open." |
|
|
Why Hyper-Nationalists Have Trolled China's Richest Man |
|
|
Russia's 'Sand-Blasting' Tactics in Ukraine |
Ukraine's military finds itself out-gunned by Russian forces, as pro-Trump congressional Republicans block further US military aid and as Europe has failed to deliver the quantity of artillery shells it promised. Observers expect a new Russian offensive this year. Given those conditions, CNN's Tim Lister writes that Russia is using battlefield tactics that play to its advantage in quantity: "In an attack that defied logic, a Russian armored column lumbered across open countryside near the [Ukrainian] village of Tonenke in Donetsk and was picked off by drones and anti-tank weapons. Geolocated videos indicate that the Russians lost about a dozen tanks as well as other armored vehicles. Once more, Ukrainian units repelled a poorly-planned assault and held their positions. But these frequent mechanized ground attacks by the Russians are like sand-blasting—eroding Ukrainian defenses in multiple spots along the frontlines. Kateryna Stepanenko at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington says Russia's likely goal is to test Ukrainian defenses for weak spots and strain Ukrainian defensive capabilities ahead of reported upcoming summer offensive operations." |
|
|
To Understand 2024, Look to 1892? |
What a strange election year. Two historically unpopular candidates, both of whom have served as US president already, are vying against each other. A third-party disruptor is poised to take a surprising share of votes in key states, if he makes it onto the ballot. In a New York Times guest opinion essay, Jon Grinspan writes that this is eerily similar to the often-overlooked election year of 1892. A dour, angry, Gilded Age electorate was disaffected, and campaign spending by the parties reached new heights, as the unpopular incumbent President Benjamin Harrison faced off against the former President Grover Cleveland. "People liked to joke, of the cold Harrison and the cussed Cleveland, 'One had no friends; the other, only enemies,'" Grinspan writes. Introducing a third element, the issues-based Populist Party jumped in to attack "income inequality and corporate power." Cleveland's victory wasn't the main upshot, Grinspan writes. 1892 was important because it brought new, disruptive ideas into the US political system. The democratic low point, of sorts, prompted Oregon lawyer, activist, and state representative William U'Ren to begin tinkering with "what would one day become procedures like referendums, initiatives, primaries and recalls. The first generation of independent journalists—the men and women who would later be called 'muckrakers'—took the same approach. Starting around 1892, innovators like Ida B. Wells and Henry Demarest Lloyd delved into specific incidents like lynchings or strikes, using those cases to tackle larger crises. It would take years for these approaches to conquer the mainstream, but the tools that revolutionized America life after 1900 were wrought during the fertile boredom of 1892." |
|
|
| You are receiving this newsletter because you signed up for Fareed's Global Briefing.
To stop receiving this newsletter, unsubscribe or sign up to manage your CNN account | |
® © 2024 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved.
1050 Techwood Drive NW, Atlanta, GA 30318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
