Category: News

  • Transcript: Vice President JD Vance on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Oct. 12, 2025

    Transcript: Vice President JD Vance on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Oct. 12, 2025

     

    The following is the transcript of the interview with Vice President JD Vance that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Oct. 12, 2025.


    MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to Face The Nation. We begin today with Vice President JD Vance, who joins us from Cincinnati, this morning. Good morning to you, Mr. Vice President.

    VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Good morning, Margaret, thanks for having me.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: We are getting very close to that 72 hour deadline for the hostage release. I think the world is holding its breath here. Is the administration seeing signs that Hamas and Israel are complying with everything they need to and that this will go ahead?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Yes, Margaret, so knock on wood, but we feel very confident the hostages will be released, and that the President is actually traveling to the Middle East, likely this evening, in order to meet them and greet them in person. It’s a big day for their families, but I think more importantly, it’s a big day for the entire world. The President of the United States said to his entire diplomatic team, especially Marco Rubio, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, to go and get a deal done, to stop the war in Gaza, to begin to rebuild Gaza so the population could live there in peace and prosperity, to actually eliminate the threat of terrorism to our friends in Israel- which is very, very important, and also to bring the hostages home alive. It was a very tall task. He pursued a very non traditional diplomacy with people who were not 40 year diplomats, but people who brought a fresh perspective to it. And of course, the President was criticized for it. The diplomatic team was criticized for it. But I think that because he chose a different pathway, he didn’t just do what everybody else in the past had done. We are now on the cusp of a sustainable peace in the Middle East. It’s a great moment.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: Those are some very ambitious plans in phase two in particular, of this deal. Let me ask you about some of the details, because the administration has pledged about 200 US troops from Central Command to be part of implementing this deal. They’re not going to be in Gaza, but how long will they be involved here? And more broadly, is the Trump administration fully committed to keeping the pressure on? Because those things you just mentioned aren’t going to happen overnight in terms of dismantling Hamas and building towards a stable Gaza.

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: You’re exactly right, Margaret. It is going to take consistent leverage and consistent pressure from the President of the United States on down. I know the President is very committed to doing that, but you asked about the 200 troops from Central Command. I think you put it accurately. These are not troops who are going to be put in Gaza, but they’re troops who are already at Central Command. They’ve been at that base for many, many years, and they’re going to help monitor and mediate this peace. Inevitably, there are going to be conflicts here. There are going to be things that the people in Gaza disagree with Israel about, that the Israelis disagree with the Gulf Arab states about, we see our role really as mediating some of those disputes and ensuring that the pressure stays on everybody to achieve a durable and lasting peace. One of the under reported elements of this deal Margaret is that the President convinced the entire Muslim world really both the Gulf Arab states, but as far in Southeast Asia as Indonesia, to really step up and provide ground troops so that Gaza could be secured in safety. And that actually makes it possible to rebuild. It makes it possible to dismantle those terrorist networks. It makes it possible to ensure that lasting peace that all of us care so much about. So we think that the Arab countries, the Muslim-majority countries, are going to step up in a big way with troops on the ground, we’re going to continue to play our mediation role. And I think that’s a very, very good place for all of us to be. It’s been successful thus far, and of course, we’re going to work to make it as successful all the way through as we can.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: Big picture, though, when it comes to American security. You said back in July that you’d seen what you called heartbreaking images of little kids who are clearly starving to death in Gaza and that quote, “Israel’s got to do more to let that aid in.” Are you concerned that even if, God willing, this war ends, America’s security has been endangered by this perception that America has been okay with Israel and in support of it, despite conduct that clearly you and the President didn’t agree with.

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Well, look, as the President said, you have to remember, the war started because of a brutal terrorist attack on Israeli soil, and we’ve been laser focused on eliminating the terrorist threat to the Israelis, while also ensuring that the innocent people in Gaza get the necessary humanitarian aid. That’s a difficult balance to strike, but I think if you look at the dancing in the street in Gaza, if you look at the way that the Gulf Arab states really the entire Muslim world, but also you look at how the Israelis responded. They were cheering at the mention of President Trump’s name yesterday in a massive rally in Israel. This is one of those peace deals where Muslims and Jews and Christians all seem unified that it’s a really good thing for the world. It’s a really good thing for humanity, and it happened because of President Trump’s leadership. So I actually think this peace deal will make us safer. I’m sure they’re going to be some hard feelings from the last couple of years of war. There always are. But if we can build a sustainable peace, Margaret, I am 100% sure Americans will be safer because of it.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me ask you about what’s happening here at home, or perhaps not happening when it comes to negotiations to reopen the government. There were more than 4,000 layoff notices called RIFs, or reduction in force, announcements that went out Friday to workers across seven different agencies, including Treasury and Health and Human Services. Take a listen to how the President described this.

    [SOT]

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We’ll be cutting some very popular Democrat programs that aren’t popular with Republicans, frankly, because that’s the way it works. They wanted to do this so we’ll get little taste of their own medicine.

    [END SOT]

    MARGARET BRENNAN: How are you deciding who gets laid off?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Well, the main thing that we’re focused on Margaret is ensuring essential services remain open, and obviously, in a government shutdown, we have limited funds to work with, because the appropriations that keep the government running have not been made. That’s thanks to Chuck Schumer and the Democrats. So we’re trying to do everything that we can to ensure that low income women and children get the food services that they need. We’re trying to make sure that we pay our troops because that matters for national security. We also want our people to get their paychecks. That’s where we’ve been focused, and unfortunately, what that does mean Margaret is that some federal bureaucrats are going to have to get laid off. This is not a situation that we’re excited about. We want the government to reopen, but Chuck Schumer, the Democrats decided to shut down the government, and we have to deal with the consequences in the administration, so that’s what we’re doing.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, these aren’t furloughs. These are notifications of being laid off, of losing their jobs, that’s why it’s a little different this time, and specifically when it comes to what’s happening within the health sector. CBS did confirm on Saturday that the Trump administration went and rescinded some of the layoffs of hundreds of CDC scientists who were mistakenly laid off on Friday, and then told Saturday that’s not the case, but some of them were involved with the federal measles response. Some of them were involved with the response on Ebola. How does a mistake like this happen? Did the White House even talk to the CDC?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Well, so- so two- two responses to that, Margaret. First of all, I want to assure the American people that the frontline health care workers, the people who monitor measles, Ebola and other infectious diseases, those people are still on the job, and we’re trying very hard to figure out how to ensure those people get a paycheck, of course, because we want them to be happy and healthy. We want them to be able to do their jobs well. But the second point, Margaret, is the government shutdown inevitably leads to some chaos. We are figuring out how to take money from some areas and give it to other areas. That chaos is because Schumer and the far left Democrats shut down the government. We have to remember, Margaret, that the vast majority of Republicans and- and to their great credit, a number of moderate Democrats, have consistently voted to reopen the government. But if Chuck Schumer and the far left Senate Democrats are going to shut down the government, that is going to lead to some chaos. So you ask, how does this mistake happen? It happened because Chuck Schumer shut down the government, and we’re trying to make sure that essential services still function in the face of that shutdown.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: But that was a White House decision to lay off these individuals. You heard the President talking about that. That- that wasn’t Chuck Schumer’s decision. I understand your broader point on the negotiations, but the layoffs came from the president and the White House.

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: But my point is, Margaret, that we have to do layoffs because we have to preserve necessary resources to do the most critical things that the government does, and in that phase, you’re going to have some chaos. You’re going to lay off people, frankly, Margaret, that the White House doesn’t want to lay off. We would like to reopen the government and ensure the essential- essential services stay on. But unfortunately, in an environment where we’re dealing with limited resources, where the government is shut down, we’ve got to move some things around. And in that moving things around, there is some chaos, there is some unpredictability, but we’re trying to do everything that we can with the- the hand of cards that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats have dealt us. That’s our solemn promise, and that’s our duty to the American people, but there’s going to be chaos. That’s why we want to open the government. That’s why we want the Democrats to accept that the government should be open.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: But are you confident that these job cuts are legal, that these reductions in force during a shutdown are going to withstand legal scrutiny, given that some unions are saying this is a violation of the Anti Deficiency Act?

    JD VANCE: Well, we are confident. Margaret, of course, we always follow the law, and we always follow court cases, and we think that we have the authority to do what we need to do. I’m sure that some people will sue, and that will get figured out in court. But the reality is, we have to remember, why are we in this situation, Margaret? All these conversations about whether it’s a temporary layoff or a permanent layoff – we are dealing with a terrible, chaotic situation, because Chuck Schumer and a few far left Democrats decided to shut down the government. If they just joined with the moderate Democrats and the vast majority of Republicans, we can open up the government, and all of these conversations will no longer be necessary.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: When I pressed leader Schumer on this program just last Sunday about this, about reopening the government, he said it’s going to take getting everyone in the same room with the President of the United States. Only the five people, including the President, he said, can solve it. Why doesn’t the President insist that lawmakers come back to Washington sit with him and talk this through?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Well, as Chuck Schumer said, it’s not all lawmakers. It’s the Senate leadership that really is driving this shutdown. The House has already passed a bill to reopen the government. It’s the Senate, and again, it’s a far left sort of contingent of Senate Democrats who are keeping the government shut down.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: But the president says he’s a deal maker. Why doesn’t he force a deal here? Why doesn’t he tell Republicans like the speaker, get your lawmakers back here, come into my office, let’s hammer this thing out.

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Margaret, it’s a totally fair question, and the answer is, because this isn’t a deal making. This isn’t a negotiation. This is hostage taking. Chuck Schumer has not said to us, this is what we need. He said that unless you give us what we need, we’re going to shut down the government. That is a totally different thing. If Chuck Schumer wants to come into the Oval Office or come to my house, he is welcome to talk about how to fix health care policy for Americans. Of course, we want to lower insurance premiums. We want to make sure that the skyrocketing health care costs of the Biden administration start to level off and hopefully come down. That’s one conversation. But you don’t come into the Oval Office and say, unless you, the President of the United States, give us everything that I want, I’m going to shut down the government. I’m going to deny low income women and children their food benefits. I’m not going to pay the troops. That is what Chuck Schumer has put us in the situation of doing. We don’t negotiate with a person who has taken the entire federal government hostage over a health care policy dispute. And I think that basic principle you saw Barack Obama say this to Ted Cruz and a number of Republicans, we want to talk about health care policy, but we’re not going to shut down the government over this. That’s all that Donald Trump is now saying to Chuck Schumer and the far left Democrats: we are not going to negotiate over opening the government. We’ll negotiate on health care policy, but only once you do your job and open up the people’s government.

    MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, just a quick follow there. Though, what is your vision for that health care policy? Do you want these tax credits to fade out over time, extend them and then fade them out? Are you open to making them permanent?

    VICE PRESIDENT VANCE: Well, the tax credits go to some people deservedly. And we think the tax credits actually go to a lot of waste and fraud within the insurance industry. So we want to make sure that the tax credits go to the people who need them. We also think that Obamacare gave the health insurance industry a lot of ridiculous regulations that if we cut out, we could give people access to better health care at a lower cost. That’s what we’re working on. And again, I think there’s a lot of agreement, actually Margaret, that’s the crazy thing about this. There’s a lot of willingness to negotiate, a lot of willingness to compromise from both the moderate Democrats and certainly from the White House. But if the far left Democrats led by Chuck Schumer are going to shut down the government and refuse to open up the government unless they get everything they want, that’s not a negotiation, that’s a hostage taking, and we’re not going to reward that kind of behavior from Washington, D.C.

    MARGARET BRENNAN:  All right, Mr. Vice President, thank you for your time this morning. ‘Face the Nation’ will be back in one minute. Stay with us.

    avots

  • Trump eliminates the main saboteur of the relationship with Musk in the White House change

    Trump eliminates the main saboteur of the relationship with Musk in the White House change

     

    Donald Trump expelled the main saboteur of his relationship with Elon Musk from the White House.

    Sergio Gor served as director of the Presidential Personnel Office, controlling hiring and firing across the administration – with a special focus on loyalty.

    But now he will be the US ambassador to India and will be replaced by Dan Scavino, who has worked for the president since he was first hired at age 16 as Trump’s caddy.

    The seismic shake-up in the White House comes after Gor clashed explosively with Elon Musk over the billionaire’s choice for NASA chief Jared Isaacman.

    Musk left the Trump administration days after Isaacman was abandoned by the White House and labeled Gor “a snake.” Gor allegedly ran through the West Wing, giddy showing Tesla’s stock price falling on his phone.

    Gor’s removal from the White House comes as Trump has met with Isaacman in recent weeks to discuss reviving his NASA nomination. It was taken down in May after Gor dropped a dossier on Trump’s desk showing Isaacman’s donations to Democrats.

    Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday morning: ‘I am pleased to announce that the great Dan Scavino, in addition to remaining as Deputy Chief of Staff in the Trump Administration, will head the White House Office of Presidential Personnel, replacing Sergio Gor, who has done a wonderful job in that position, and will now become the Ambassador to India.

    ‘Dan will be responsible for the selection and appointment of almost all positions in the government, a very large and important position. Congratulations Dan, you will do a fantastic job!!!’ Trump added.

    From left: Aide Walt Nauta, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Assistant to the President Sergio Gor and an aide wait for U.S. President Donald Trump to board Marine One on the South Lawn before joining him on May 1

    From left: Aide Walt Nauta, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Assistant to the President Sergio Gor and an aide wait for U.S. President Donald Trump to board Marine One on the South Lawn before joining him on May 1

    Trump and Musk talk before leaving the White House on the way to his South Florida home in Mar-a-Lago, Fla., on March 14.

    Trump and Musk talk before leaving the White House on the way to his South Florida home in Mar-a-Lago, Fla., on March 14.

    Katie Miller, wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, listens as White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino and White House Communications Director Stephen Cheung look at their smartphones during a press conference with US President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, May 30

    Katie Miller, wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, listens as White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino and White House Communications Director Stephen Cheung look at their smartphones during a press conference with US President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, May 30

    Gor was announced as the government’s ambassador to India on September 8 and confirmed in the role on October 7.

    Nick Solheim, CEO of the conservative nonprofit training organization American Moment, who worked alongside the Presidential Personnel Office during the Trump transition, said: ‘Mr. Gor did a great job revolutionizing the Presidential Personnel Office.

    ‘He will continue to do great things as President Trump’s representative in India. This deployment to such a critical nation as India reflects the confidence Mr. Gor has in delivering on the President’s agenda.’

    Regarding Scavino taking on the new staff role, Solheim noted that “there is no one better than Dan Scavino to lead the PPO as someone who has worked closely with the President for decades. I believe Mr. Scavino will continue Mr. Gor’s tradition of placing ideologically aligned people in positions of high influence to advance the President’s agenda.”

     

     

    avots

  • CUSMA renegotiation will not solve all trade problems with the US, says Carney

    CUSMA renegotiation will not solve all trade problems with the US, says Carney

     

    Prime Minister Mark Carney says it’s clear the U.S. will continue to target certain sectors with tariffs even after the renegotiation of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Trade Agreement.

    Negotiations to update the agreement, known in Canada as CUSMA, are expected to begin next year, but Carney said those negotiations are unlikely to resolve all outstanding issues.

    Get the day's top news, political, economic and current affairs headlines delivered to your inbox once a day.

    Receive daily national news

    Get the day’s top news, political, economic and current affairs headlines delivered to your inbox once a day.

    That’s why Canada is trying to reach agreements in the meantime on specific tariffs on sectors such as steel, aluminum, automobiles and softwood lumber, he said.

    Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc returned from Washington on Friday, saying discussions will continue with U.S. officials to push for tariff relief.

    During a meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Carney at the White House on Tuesday, Trump told reporters there will still be tariffs on Canada in the future and that he doesn’t care if CUSMA is renegotiated or replaced with different agreements.

    Story continues below the ad

    The vast majority of Canadian trade with the U.S. is exempt from tariffs under the trade deal, but Trump has targeted the steel, aluminum, auto, energy and lumber sectors with tariffs.


    &copy 2025 The Canadian Press

    avots

  • Golf: Tiger Woods undergoes lumbar disc replacement, recovery timeline uncertain

    Golf: Tiger Woods undergoes lumbar disc replacement, recovery timeline uncertain

    avots

  • ‘We will do the right thing’: Cabinet minister signals benefit cap for two children will be scrapped

    ‘We will do the right thing’: Cabinet minister signals benefit cap for two children will be scrapped

    Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson says she will be ‘championing’ the change

    avots

  • Seychelles opposition leader wins presidential election

    Seychelles opposition leader wins presidential election

     

    Seychelles’ main opposition leader Patrick Herminie won the presidential election, defeating incumbent Wavel Ramkalawan in the second round, according to official results released by the electoral commission.

    Herminie won 52.7% of the vote, compared to Ramkalawan’s 47.3%.

    In his victory speech, Herminie promised to reduce the cost of living, revive public services and unite the island nation, saying the result marked “a new chapter for all Seychellois”.

    After losing his bid for a second term, Ramkalawan congratulated Herminie on his victory, saying he leaves “a legacy that makes many presidents blush.”

    The election went to a second round after none of the candidates obtained an absolute majority in the first round two weeks ago.

    Former speaker of parliament, Herminie was accused of witchcraft in 2023, in what he said was a politically motivated attempt to thwart his presidential ambitions.

    The charges were dropped in 2024, clearing the way for him to run for office.

    “I will be the president of all Seychellois and end divisions, ending preferences and giving everyone the opportunity to prosper,” said Herminie in his victory speech.

    Ramkalawan is the latest president to lose elections in Africa, with Malawi’s president, Lazarus Chakwera, being removed from power last month, amid growing discontent with the rising cost of living.

    Herminie’s party, United Seychelles (USA), won parliamentary elections with a solid majority last month, regaining control after previously losing it to Rakalawan’s Linyon Demokratik Seselwa (LDS).

    avots

  • Telangana intensifies pulse campaign against polio, aims to cover 17.56 lakh children in six districts

    Telangana intensifies pulse campaign against polio, aims to cover 17.56 lakh children in six districts

     

    Hyderabad District Collector Harichandana Dasari launched Pulse polio immunization drive on Sunday.

    Hyderabad District Collector Harichandana Dasari launched Pulse polio immunization drive on Sunday. | Photo credit: RAMAKRISHNA G.

    Hyderabad District Collector Hari Chandana Dasari administered the polio vaccine to children, initiating the Pulse Polio campaign in the city on Sunday at the Housing Board Colony in Bagh Lingampally and the Urban Primary Health Center (UPHC) in Tilak Nagar.

    “Our team has generated enough awareness in and around UPHC to encourage as many parents as possible to bring their children for vaccination,” said Deepthi, a doctor at UPHC.

    The Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has identified 290 districts across India for this special campaign from October 12 to 15. In Telangana, the campaign is being conducted in six districts: Hyderabad, Rangareddy, Medchal Malkajgiri, Sangareddy, Hanamkonda and Warangal. The Health department estimates that approximately 17.56 lakh children under the age of five live in these districts.

    In Hyderabad district, the campaign targets 5.17 lakh children under five years of age, covering 9.36 lakh families through 2,636 vaccination centers. Nearly 10,635 employees including doctors, nurses and ASHA workers have been deployed to ensure smooth execution of the campaign. Additionally, 50 transit points have been installed at important locations such as Secunderabad, Nampally and Kacheguda railway stations, Ameerpet metro station and MGBS and JBS bus stands. These centers will be open 24 hours a day until midnight on October 14th.

    “We have identified 164 high-risk areas across the district, including construction sites, urban slums, deprived localities and nomadic settlements. Teams have been deployed to ensure that all eligible children are covered,” said Hyderabad District Medical and Health Officer J. Venkati.

    Telangana last reported a case in Nalgonda district in 2007, while Hyderabad’s last case dates back to 1998. Since 2016, the city has transitioned from the trivalent oral polio vaccine (tOPV) to the bivalent version (bOPV) and has also introduced inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), said Ms.

    avots

  • This week in "Sunday morning" (October 12)

    This week in "Sunday morning" (October 12)

    A look at features from this week’s broadcast of the Emmy-winning show hosted by Jane Pauley.

    avots

  • Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 32: Israel’s whack-a-mole – Foes face extinction in a futile chase

    Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 32: Israel’s whack-a-mole – Foes face extinction in a futile chase

     

    Palestinians may celebrate the Gaza ceasefire, but their relief will be short-lived. The Bible – and game theory – explain why.

    “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee” (Genesis 12:3, KJV)

    Disguised in wigs and skirts and carrying submachine guns, an Israeli commando from an elite special forces unit moved through Beirut’s dark streets, hunting the masterminds of the Munich massacre. A door swung open, gunfire, a body fell. Only later did the team realize the man was not their target.

    The lesson is stark: When harmed, Israel exacts revenge relentlessly, pursuing perpetrators until the score is settled – and the innocent may not be spared.

    Broad swathes of the Palestinian population – including Hamas members – rejoiced at the 10 October 2025 Gaza ceasefire. Shortly after it took effect, Hamas combatants resurfaced prominently in Gaza for the world to see – an ostentatious display of defiant resistance.

    Yet in reality, there is little reason for Palestinians, particularly Hamas, to celebrate. Israel still holds the power of life and death over all Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank – an unnatural state of affairs, but a grim reality.

    True to its habitual logic and consistent pattern of retribution, Israel is poised soon to resume its relentless campaign of destruction in Gaza and beyond – literally stepping over bodies. Difficult, costly, time-consuming, and potentially unpopular, the strategy is nevertheless deemed essential for preventing future attacks, maintaining credibility, and ensuring the very survival of the state. It reflects Israel’s realist approach, prioritizing national interests over politics, ideology, and narrow moral concerns.

    Specifically, Israel – succumbing to threat bias and operating in a whatever-it-takes mode – is very likely to swiftly renew its devastating assault on the Palestinian population at large for three interrelated reasons.

    1. Prevention and deterrence

    Israel’s vengeance in an extended pursuit can be understood as a forward-looking stance. It neutralizes active perpetrators and dismantles terrorist infrastructure, while offering both intelligence and operational benefits.

    Strategically, it provides opportunities to gain insights into what Israel describes as terrorist networks and logistics, allowing authorities to anticipate and disrupt future threats. On the tactical level, it enables the interception of arms, funds, and communications, as well as the targeting of secondary actors who might otherwise perpetuate a seemingly endless cycle of violence.

    The relentless pursuit of perpetrators also functions as a form of deterrence, lowering the likelihood of future attacks by signaling Israel’s operational capability and resolve to its adversaries.

    Crucially, unremitting punitive action mitigates the game-theoretical problem of time inconsistency – shifts in behavior over the course of events, encouraging hostage-taking and other coercive actions by adversaries.

    True deterrence demands a consistent no-negotiation policy, yet once hostages are seized, governments often concede under duress to save lives, rewarding crime and ensuring repetition. The short-term relief of capitulation carries long-term costs, as hostage-takers anticipate such weakness and exploit it in the future.

    This dilemma is most acute in liberal democracies, where compassion for captives fuels political pressure that can unseat leaders. Authoritarian regimes, by contrast, often preserve deterrence by refusing to bargain, sacrificing hostages to prevent future incidents, a brutal but effective strategy.

    Deterrence lies at the heart of Israel’s security doctrine, aiming at ensuring that every attack carries enduring consequences. Its logic is twofold: general deterrence, which warns others by showing that no perpetrator escapes pursuit, and specific deterrence, which keeps fugitive assailants under perpetual threat, limiting their ability to operate. For a small, exposed nation long beset by enemies, deterrence is not mere strategy but a means of survival.


    Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 31: Trump’s Nobel test – A cheatsheet for multicentrics

    Despite its uncompromising stance that terrorism must never be rewarded, Israel indirectly negotiated with Hamas in the lead-up to the 10 October 2025 ceasefire, agreeing to release Palestinian prisoners in exchange for hostages.

    Strategically, this was a game-theoretical blunder, incentivizing future abductions. Psychologically, it produced cognitive dissonance: the tension between principle and action.

    Israel’s likely route to resolving the dissonance lies in retribution – resuming its blighting campaign against Hamas and eliminating freed prisoners to signal that hostage-taking gains nothing. A cynic might add that the ceasefire deal was profitable anyway: It saved Israel the cost of continued imprisonment while ensuring those released would not live to cause harm again.

    2. Retributive justice

    Retributive justice, a moral and legal balancing act, is the idea that punishment should be proportional to the wrong committed: If someone harms others, they deserve consequences in kind.

    Unlike forward-looking approaches – such as deterrence (which aims to prevent future wrongdoing), or restorative justice (which seeks to heal relationships and repair harm), or utilitarian strategies (which focus on maximizing overall social welfare) – retributive justice is backward-looking, focused squarely on the past act and the perpetrator’s moral responsibility.

    It is a core principle in ethics and law because it affirms that crimes have consequences, reinforcing a societal sense of fairness and accountability, restoring a precarious and delicate balance. In essence, it says: Wrongdoing demands redress, independent of any future benefit.

    For Israel, retributive justice is not abstract – it is a guiding principle in national security and conflict response. When perpetrators of attacks against Israeli civilians or soldiers are identified, punishment is not only a practical necessity for deterrence and intelligence-gathering; it is a moral imperative.

    This explains why, even after the safe return of hostages from Gaza, Israel is likely to resume military operations: The attackers’ initial crimes against innocent citizens still remain unredressed, and retribution is required to restore moral and legal balance.

    In the broader context, this stance aligns with Israel’s traditional approach to security – its society expects that wrongdoing will not go unanswered, that enemies will face consequences.

    3. Symbolic messaging

    Beyond deterrence and retribution, Israel’s forceful actions convey a profound religious, cultural, and historical message. Its military and intelligence operations represent not merely a pragmatic choice – they symbolically reinforce the identity, values, resilience, and collective memory of the Jewish state, shaping norms and expectations in a society shaped by historical trauma and existential threat.

    God’s covenant in Genesis 12:3 promises blessing for those who support Israel and curses for those who oppose it, establishing a moral principle linking human behavior to divine justice. Attacks against Israel, like Balaam’s failed curse (Numbers 22–24), reinforce national resilience and identity rather than weaken it.

    Israel bears a divine duty to pursue justice (“Justice, justice shall you pursue,” Deuteronomy 16:20), and preventing or confronting evil remains obligatory even if immediate action is impossible.

    The command to “remember what Amalek did unto thee” (Deuteronomy 25:17) transforms memory into moral vigilance, guarding against the recurrence of cruelty and unprovoked aggression and preserving the nation’s ethics and collective soul.

    The approach of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is consistent with how the people of Israel has long responded to threats: from the vengeance of Simeon and Levi at Shechem – an early act of retribution to defend communal honor – to the Israelites’ punitive campaign against Midian – undertaken to avenge moral and physical aggression – to modern history, including the post-Holocaust pursuit of Nazi war criminals by figures like Simon Wiesenthal and the decades-long hunt for the masterminds of the Munich Olympics massacre.

    In each case, decisive action communicated that attacks against the Israeli people will not go unanswered, reaffirming both domestic and international perceptions and expectations.


    Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 30: Welcome to the Gaza protectorate – When surrender is called peace

    Citizens see that assaults on Israelis meet consequences, bolstering national morale, social cohesion, and confidence in the state.

    At the same time, adversaries abroad are reminded that Israel internalizes historical lessons – its survival depending on determined action – and responds to threats decisively.

    International supporters of Israel are also swayed by its symbolically embedded reputation management.

    Evangelical Christians worldwide embrace Genesis 12:3, viewing Israel as God’s channel of blessing and believing that how nations treat Israel determines God’s favor. This reading fuels ardent political and moral support Israel’s relentless actions, particularly in the US.

    Amid the religious fervor, theological inaccuracies are largely inconsequential. The evangelicals’ one-sided interpretation overlooks the New Testament perspective, which presents Israel as a “type”, foreshadowing the Church as God’s covenant people, and emphasizes love for enemies – without negating the legitimacy of just, temporal punishment.

    Ultimately, Israel’s punitive action becomes a statement of enduring principles, moral order, and national identity, connecting the present to its storied past – communicating that Israel’s values, memory of past struggles, and societal norms demand that attacks cannot go unanswered. Every operation, raid, or counterstrike carries this symbolic weight, merging strategy with religious, cultural, and historical expression.

    The Retributor’s Curse: The empire strikes back – and will be struck again

    I term this the “Retributor’s Curse” as it applies to the Jewish state: Israel’s assertion of national exceptionalism – vilifying and dooming those who resist its bid for supremacy – provokes retaliation and counter-retaliation, generating a cycle of “destructive resilience.” This pattern, a veritable paradox, runs like a red thread throughout its history, binding past and present in an epic narrative of struggle and survival.

    Israel’s religious and cultural DNA nurtures both extremism and fragility, helping explain why the nation has so often faced near-annihilation. Yet that same inner code also sustains a resilient “holy remnant,” enabling Israel, time and again, to rise from the ashes against all odds.

    Both Palestinians and Israelis are destined to suffer as a result of the ill-conceived US Gaza Peace Plan unveiled by President Donald Trump on 29 September 2025, under which the Nobel Prize-seeking dealmaker-in-chief would effectively assume the role of de-facto governor of a protectorate – a stark reminder that a bad deal can be worse than no deal at all.

    Hamas’ self-destructive miscalculation

    Hamas’ attack on Israel on 7 October 2023, which the movement saw as an act of resistance, was in reality a deadly miscalculation. Harming innocent civilians was morally reprehensible – that goes without saying. Yet, viewed against the backdrop of Israel’s self-conceived identity and moral code, even the grim logic of defiance was fatally flawed, most notably in the hostage-taking.

    While the attack shocked the world, the ruthless abduction triggered global pity – stronger than in other crises, not least because of the human relatability of the victims.

    Both aspects provided Israel with a convenient and compelling pretext to launch and sustain its disproportionate, ruinous war on Gaza and the wider region under the guise of “self-defense” and the rescue of its abducted citizens. This helped to consolidate domestic support, rally soldiers at the front, and secure diplomatic cover abroad.

    The smokescreen remained effective over time, legitimizing Israel’s military action at least until the last hostage would have been recovered and Hamas exterminated. While cynics might argue that Israel could – and would – have manufactured another pretext, none would probably have resonated as powerfully or endured as long as the living memory of beloved hostages and the nation’s longing for their return.

    Israeli PR-savvy opinion leaders in civil society sustained public compassion by renaming a plaza “Hostages Square,” holding weekly rallies with vigils, and displaying thumbnail images of all hostages across virtually every platform.

    The government escalated the narrative, framing the 2023 Hamas incursion as “Holocaust 2.0,” as it were, a resonant label reinforcing Israel’s self-image as a perpetual victim. True to form, it institutionalized a state cult of death, staging lavish son-et-lumière commemorations, relayed to the world through continuous coverage.


    Prof. Schlevogt’s Compass No. 29: Peace on powder kegs – Balm and bluff in Gaza

    Grief is natural and understandable, but exploiting it for political gain is profoundly troubling. By inflicting collective punishment on innocent Palestinians in one of the most densely populated areas in the world – while claiming that it was Hamas that brought the calamity upon them – a self-styled victim was transformed into a perpetrator of UN-confirmed war crimes. This, of course, does not exonerate Hamas.

    Astonishingly, the resistance compounded its errors. Its victory ceremony and parade of abductees on 25 January 2025 were cruel and needless, sparking global condemnation and intensifying sympathy for Israel. Hamas’ triumphal return shortly after the 10 October ceasefire further inflamed Israeli nationalists, while pro-Israeli media stoked narratives of Hamas “mobilization” to justify renewed military action.

    These events reveal that Hamas learned little, even as Israel’s relentless collective punishment inflicted unabated suffering on Palestinians. Israel’s response, grim yet unmistakably forceful, reinforced national identity and values, solidifying its stature as a formidable adversary. The harm to Palestinians, however, goes even further.

    The prospect of ultranationalist escalation

    For ultranationalists in Netanyahu’s cabinet, the 10 October 2025 Gaza ceasefire is intolerable. They crave total victory, notably, the annihilation of Hamas and the conquest of Palestine. The million-dollar question, then, is why these hardliners did not resign in protest, toppling Netanyahu.

    Before tackling this pressing question, it is crucial to recognize that Netanyahu, himself, is an ultranationalist hardliner, viewing the world strictly in binary terms of victory and defeat within a zero-sum game. Yet he employs a good-cop/bad-cop strategy, framing his extreme actions as concessions to pressure from cabinet ultranationalists.

    On 10 October 2025, he ominously reiterated that Hamas would be disarmed, whether the easy way or by force, vowing that all war aims would be achieved. Preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state is his lifelong mission, and he is unlikely to relent.

    Given this constellation, and the high probability that Hamas will not disarm voluntarily, Netanyahu has likely assured his hardliners that he will rekindle the war after the hostages’ return, and that released Palestinian prisoners will be marked for destruction. This is likely facilitated by the fact that public opinion will be largely indifferent to continued Palestinian casualties once the hostages have been freed. Israel is unlikely to relent until the masterminds of the 7 October attacks and other combatants are eliminated – even if the chase takes decades.

    Yet this strategy is ultimately futile, quite literally, a grim game of whack-a-mole on a powder keg: For every Palestinian resistance fighter – always a terrorist in Israel’s eyes – killed, a host of new, more determined combatants will emerge, striking Jews and their supporters in Israel and abroad, perpetuating a seemingly endless cycle of violence.

    Breaking this spiral requires a new, enlightened Israeli mindset, self-concept, and ethical framework – one grounded in prudent restraint and restorative justice toward external enemies.

    Moreover, Israel must pay full reparations for all the human and material devastation it has inflicted on Gaza and the wider region – it is neither fair nor just to expect other countries to foot the bill.

    At the home front, all Israeli leaders must be held accountable; those responsible for war crimes – already confirmed by the UN – must face stern punishment. Only then can a durable vision of peaceful coexistence with Israel’s neighbors, founded on shared security and prosperity, become feasible.

    avots

  • Explained: How this China spying scandal could disrupt US-UK ties

    Explained: How this China spying scandal could disrupt US-UK ties

     

    Explained: How this China spying scandal could disrupt US-UK ties

    When two men accused of spying for Beijing walked free from a London court last month, the tremors were felt far beyond Westminster. In Washington, they registered as something much more serious: a fissure in the foundation of one of the world’s most trusted intelligence partnerships. Now, the White House is warning that Britain’s failure to prosecute the alleged spies – a decision critics say was motivated by a desire to appease China – could put the “special relationship” itself at risk. As suspicions swirl around political pressure, economic influence and strategic hesitancy in London, the fallout threatens to redraw the contours of security cooperation between the UK and the US at a time when both nations face growing Chinese influence.

    Driving the news

    The White House issued an unusually blunt warning to the United Kingdom after prosecutors dropped espionage charges against two British men accused of spying for China — a decision that infuriated Washington and raised doubts about Britain’s reliability as a security partner.The collapse of the high-profile case against Chris Cash, a former parliamentary investigator, and Christopher Berry, an academic, has sparked a political storm in London and a diplomatic row with Washington. Senior Trump administration officials say continued information sharing could be at risk, as Republicans urge the UK to revive the prosecution to send a clear message to Beijing.

    Why does this matter

    For decades, the UK and the US have shared some of the world’s most sensitive information under the “Five Eyes” alliance. That trust depends on both sides treating espionage threats with equal seriousness. The decision to drop the charges – reportedly because the administration refused to label China an “enemy” – is being seen in Washington as a sign that London is softening to Beijing, just as President Trump escalates a trade war and warns allies about Chinese infiltration.If Britain is seen as politically reluctant to confront Chinese espionage, U.S. officials say, intelligence cooperation — the bedrock of the transatlantic security relationship — could be undermined.

    The Big Picture

    The collapsed case: Cash and Berry were charged under the Official Secrets Act 1911, accused of passing confidential information to a Chinese agent between 2021 and 2023. Prosecutors said Berry produced at least 34 reports to Beijing, some damaging to the UK’s national security. But the case imploded when authorities refused to define China as an “enemy” – a legal requirement for prosecution.Washington’s Anger: A senior US official warned that failure to prosecute “coercion and adversarial influence” could limit future intelligence sharing. John Moolenaar, head of the House Committee on China, urged Britain not to let the case “falter”.Political consequences in London: Opposition parties, former spy chiefs and conservative leaders have accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of appeasing China to secure investment. They allege that Treasury and National Security Advisor Jonathan Powell pressured prosecutors to drop the case and delay the publication of a critical audit on China.Powell under attack: Powell, once chief of staff to Tony Blair, faces calls to resign. He is linked to pro-China groups and was reportedly involved in negotiations over the return of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, an ally of Beijing. Government sources deny that he influenced the decision.Trade and diplomacy entangled: China has tied major economic incentives to its demands. Beijing’s ambassador warned that the planned new Chinese embassy in London would not come to fruition without guarantees. Jingye, the Chinese owner of British Steel, has offered to waive a billion-pound compensation claim if the embassy is approved.Broader voltages: The scandal comes as Trump increases tariffs on Chinese goods to 130% and accuses Beijing of restricting essential mineral exports. Meanwhile, Starmer’s government is accused of softening Britain’s stance on China, including on sensitive issues such as Huawei, foreign investment and human rights.What’s next: Parliament is expected to hold an emergency debate. Conservatives are exploring legal action against the government under the National Security Law, and pressure is growing for a public explanation from the attorney general. With trust between the US and UK now visibly strained, the fate of future intelligence cooperation – and British policy towards China – hangs in the balance.

    avots