Connect with us

Washington

Five questions for Washington amid bloodshed in Israel and Gaza

Published

on

Five questions for Washington amid bloodshed in Israel and Gaza


The world is reeling as it watches events in Israel and Gaza.

As of Monday afternoon, around 800 Israelis had been confirmed dead as a result of Hamas’s surprise attack. Around 700 Palestinians had been killed in response.

The crisis has no immediate end in sight. On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged that “though Israel didn’t start this war, Israel will finish it.”

Netanyahu also contended, in relation to Hamas, that Israel “will exact a price that will be remembered by them and Israel’s other enemies for decades to come.”

Advertisement

For its part, Hamas said that it would execute hostages — and broadcast the executions — in response to future bombings of civilian housing by Israel.

The grim situation has big implications for American politics, too.

Beyond the devastating human toll in the Middle East, here are some of the biggest questions confronting Washington. 

Was Iran behind the attack?

This is one of the biggest questions. It has not yet been answered in a definitive way.

Iran is a key supporter of Hamas, and of several other Palestinian armed groups.

Advertisement

But backing for the overall cause does not necessarily translate into knowledge of the specifics of the plan to invade Israel.

The most concrete report of Iranian involvement so far came in a Wall Street Journal story on Sunday.

The Journal’s reporters wrote that Iranian security officials had given “the green light” for the attack at a recent meeting in Beirut. 

The story also included the claim that “officers of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps had worked with Hamas since August” to conceive the invasion.

The Journal’s most dramatic claims were sourced to unnamed “senior members of Hamas and Hezbollah.” But it also included denials, both from a Hamas official and from a spokesperson for the Iranian mission to the United Nations, that there had been coordination.

Advertisement

Notably, neither the American government nor the Israeli government has stated definitively that Iran was involved. 

A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Force (IDF) told Politico on Monday that “we have no evidence or proof” Iran was behind the attack, though he added that Israel was certain “the Iranians were not surprised.” 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, “We have not yet seen evidence that Iran directed or was behind this particular attack, but there is certainly a long relationship.”

The question of Iranian involvement is so vital because, were it to be proven, both Israel and the United States would be obligated to take some kind of action against Tehran — which in turn could enlarge the conflict.

How big are the political dangers for President Biden?

Republican presidential candidates have been lining up to bash President Biden for what they contend is his weakness on the international stage.

Advertisement

In particular, they’ve been condemning the deal reached in August that unfroze $6 billion in Iranian funds in return for the release of five Americans.

Former President Trump said Biden had whittled away at Middle East peace “at a far more rapid pace than anyone thought possible.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis wrote on social media that “Iran has helped fund this war against Israel and Joe Biden’s policies that have gone easy on Iran have helped fill their coffers.”

And former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Blinken’s claim that the $6 billion could not have been used in the attack — since it is restricted to humanitarian purposes — was “irresponsible.”

On one level, the attack on Israel plays into the Republican attack line that Democrats in general, and Biden in particular, are too soft with American adversaries. 

Advertisement

Versions of this argument have been used in relation to China, as well as Iran, throughout the Biden presidency.

Still, there is no certainty that voters will blame Biden for events on the other side of the world that even Israel’s vaunted security apparatus failed to see coming.

In addition, Biden’s experience can appeal to voters in moments of international crisis.

His response to Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the way he assembled a coalition to resist it, won plaudits in the months afterward.

Could the conflict affect aid to Ukraine?

Events in Israel and Gaza could have an effect on the war in Ukraine in at least two ways.

Advertisement

In big-picture terms, there are questions about whether any increased American commitments to Israel could sap American public will for aid to Ukraine. 

Public support for Ukraine’s effort to repel the Russian invasion has dipped over time. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week, only a narrow plurality of adults — 41 percent to 35 percent — supported America continuing to arm Ukraine. In May, a poll from the same organizations found Americans favored arming Ukraine by a wider, 17-point margin.

It seems plausible that requests for additional aid to Israel could make Americans even less willing to countenance heavy spending for Ukraine.

However, in terms of the congressional process, there is already some talk about putting both aid to Israel and to Ukraine into any new spending deal. 

Such a deal will need to be agreed upon by Nov. 17, otherwise the government will shut down. 

Advertisement

Putting aid for both nations into a must-pass package could be one way for advocates of such aid to overcome resistance.

How will it impact Congress and the race for Speaker?

It is a bad look, by any reasonable standard, for the House to be without a Speaker in the middle of an international crisis.

Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) holds tightly circumscribed powers, limited mainly to facilitating the election of a proper replacement for Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who was toppled as Speaker last week.

In essence, the situation leaves the House frozen. 

The immediate effects are more symbolic than substantive — for example, it makes it more cumbersome for the House to pass a resolution condemning Hamas.

Advertisement

If the House were to spend prolonged time without a Speaker, it would hamper the fulfillment of any Israeli request for supplemental help, beyond the $3 billion-plus of aid the U.S. already provides.

The lack of a Speaker is also one more example of the dysfunction that has caused the nation’s politics to seize up in recent years.

The net effect could nudge House Republicans to select a Speaker more quickly than they otherwise would do this week. 

A vote could come as soon as Wednesday, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) as the only two declared candidates.

McCarthy has become a bit of a wild card, however. 

Advertisement

Twice on Monday — during an interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show and at a Capitol Hill press conference — he held the door ajar to a possible return to the Speakership, even while stopping well short of announcing a candidacy.

Could the Jewish American vote shift anytime soon?

Republican attacks on Biden play well with GOP primary voters, but it’s a lot less clear whether they will bring about any major shift in the Jewish vote.

Jewish Americans have traditionally been a strong pillar of Democratic support. There is little evidence that increased GOP efforts to win Jewish voters have had a major impact.

A Pew Research Center survey published in 2021 found that 71 percent of American Jews identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party, while 26 percent favor Republicans.

Jewish voters chose Biden over Trump by almost 40 points in 2020 — 69 percent to 30 percent — according to a voter analysis commissioned by The Associated Press and Fox News. The 69 percent Biden won was exactly the same figure as that won by then-President Obama in his 2012 reelection win over GOP nominee Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

Advertisement

It’s possible, of course, that the seismic shock of the Hamas attack could force some kind of realignment, especially if new details emerge that are damning of the Biden administration.

Still, Jewish support for Democrats has proven resilient for decades.

Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Washington

Report: Wake Forest to hire Washington State coach Jake Dickert

Published

on

Report: Wake Forest to hire Washington State coach Jake Dickert


Jake Dickert has been in charge at Washington State since midway through the 2021 season. (Photo by Brian Murphy/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

Wake Forest moved quickly to secure its new head coach.

According to the Athletic, the Demon Deacons are hiring Washington State coach Jake Dickert just days after Dave Clawson stepped down. Clawson announced Monday that he was resigning after 11 seasons as the team’s head coach.

Washington State is 23-20 in three-plus seasons under Dickert. He took over midway through the 2021 season after coach Nick Rolovich was fired over a prolonged vaccination fight with the university. The Cougars have posted two winning seasons in Dickert’s three full seasons with the school and were 8-4 in 2024 during their first season in college football’s wilderness.

Advertisement

Oregon State and Washington State were effectively left without a conference ahead of the season when 10 of the Pac-12’s members found other conferences. Oregon State and Wazzu made up the “conference” portion of their schedules via an alliance with the Mountain West and are spearheading an effort to rebuild the Pac-12 with an assortment of current Mountain West teams.

Washington State lost three straight games to end the season after an 8-1 start in 2024, though the Cougars were one of the more entertaining teams in college football. Washington State scored nearly 37 points per game but gave up over 28 points a contest.

QB John Mateer led college football with 44 total touchdowns, though he too is leaving Washington State. Dickert announced Monday that Mateer would be entering the transfer portal.

Mateer’s decision to transfer comes as Washington State offensive coordinator Ben Arbuckle was hired as Oklahoma’s offensive coordinator. The turnover in Pullman may be indicative of Washington State’s tough future ahead at the top level of college football as the Cougars are no longer part of a power conference.

Wake Forest went 4-8 in 2024 for a second consecutive four-win season. The Demon Deacons won 11 games in 2021 but fell to 8-5 in 2022 before going 4-8 in 2023. In 11 seasons at Wake Forest, Clawson’s teams went 67-69 with seven bowl appearances. He came to Wake Forest after five years in charge at Bowling Green. The Falcons were 32-32 in his time there and went to three bowl games.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Congressman-elect Cleo Fields discusses transition to Washington, D.C.

Published

on

Congressman-elect Cleo Fields discusses transition to Washington, D.C.


(KALB) – State Senator Cleo Fields is getting ready to head to Washington, D.C., as a newly elected U.S. congressman. Fields sat down with KALB’s Jay McCully to discuss his plans to represent Louisianans in Congress.

Click here to report a typo. Please provide the title of the article in your email.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Washington becomes CT's first town to get approval for speed enforcement cameras

Published

on

Washington becomes CT's first town to get approval for speed enforcement cameras


A small Connecticut town is slated to get some new technology to curb heavy feet. Washington is the first municipality in the state to receive approval for speed enforcement cameras.

Residents were pleased to hear the technology will be online soon.

“If people could just slow down and enjoy the town instead of speeding through it,” said Cynthia Quinn, who lives in town.

She is in favor of the technology rolling out, describing for us her method of stepping completely off the roadway when walking – because of speeders.

Advertisement

“People walk on these roads, they ride their bikes, they have their kids and people are going really really fast,” Quinn said.

Washington received approval from the Connecticut DOT for rollout of speed cameras on three local roads. One Is slated to be operating at the start of 2025.

“The number one volume of calls I get in my office every day is about speeding on our roads,” said First Selectman James Brinton.

The technology in town he said was a no-brainer. They went through the process of approving a town ordinance, and after some initial questions from townsfolk, and hearing the concerns from his residents, the technology was nearly unanimously approved. The main reason was safety.

“This was never about revenue, this is about getting our roads safer,” said Brinton.

Advertisement

The cameras are designed to run license plates of speeding cars. Violations recorded have to be approved by the town’s police officer, and when approved, a citation is sent in the mail. Fines are capped at $75 dollars and the money generated – per Connecticut law – must go back to the town for other roadway safety initiatives.

“Probably the number one complaint we get here in Washington, is speeding,” reiterated Officer Rich Innaimo with the Washington Police Department.

Full time, it’s himself, and a resident State Trooper in Washington.

The technology he said will work in tandem with radar they already run, and plan to continue. It’s an aid, not a replacement, according to Innaimo.

“Our ultimate goal is to get people to slow down,” he said.

Advertisement

Placement of the cameras has to be data driven.

“It’s meant to be in the most dangerous areas based on data, based on community feedback,” said Josh Morgan, a spokesperson with the CT DOT.  

Concerns have been raised by groups like the ACLU of CT since the beginning of discussions around speed safety technology, and red-light camera technology.

The ACLU of Connecticut was involved in discussions around the law allowing the speed cameras from the jump. They don’t believe speed enforcement or red light camera technology is the right way to go. But based on how the law is written, they believe Connecticut has the potential to get the rollout of the tech right. They plan to monitor the data and rollout of the cameras around Connecticut closely.

“We anticipate lots of ups and downs but ultimately we will be looking at the data as it rolls in to ensure its being rolled out in a fair and equitable way that comparts with the constitution,” said Executive Director of the ACLU of CT David McQuire.

Advertisement

When asked about the technology, people from different towns expressed mixed feelings about the technology becoming reality and expanding to different areas.

“Again, I’m not crazy about it, I’d rather know that I had been speeding and why I was stopped,” said Mari Frohne.

She noted receiving the citation in the mail doesn’t please her. She would prefer the interaction with an officer about any violations she found herself in.

Others though were intrigued by the potential safety benefits.

“I live on a street that has a 25-m.p.h. speed limit on an S curve and people are doing 50 m.p.h. on that thing, so if it’s going to save some lives, I’m for it,” said Carl Cruz.

Advertisement

He noted similar tech has been around in other areas, and he believes if it changes reckless driver behavior, it should be used.

But with residents in town concerned with speeding, it came down to safety. People like Quinn hope starting with three cameras, proves moving the needle in the right direction is possible.

“You just see an increase in pedestrians being hit I don’t think there is any downside to people just being slower,” said Quinn.

Major cities like Stamford and New Haven remain in the approval process phase of getting the OK for the rollout of the technology.

Since the cameras aren’t ‘set and forget,’ the law states approval is good for three-year terms. So in three years’ time, the cameras will need re-approval to remain, or new approval to expand or move.  

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending