This article was written by Oz Bin Nun , head of LIBRAEL's content team. The opinions expressed are his alone. The pro-choice protest in Wisconsin. " Alongside the chants for abortion rights, there were other signs." When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade , my wife and I joined a protest in Wisconsin to stand up for women’s rights over their bodies. But during the march, something changed in me. Alongside the chants for abortion rights, there were other signs - against Zionism, against capitalism, and even against the U.S. itself. I understand and respect the idea of intersectionality, but in real time - when the rights of tens of millions of women were being taken away - these messages not only strayed from the main issue, they created a sense of alienation. They made me, and many others, feel that there was no room in this just struggle for anyone who didn’t hold the full package of “correct” views. I understand and respect the idea of intersectionality, but in real time these messages not only strayed from the main issue, they created a sense of alienation. Instead of a broad front that invites partnership, we got an atmosphere of ideological purity tests. This isn’t just an aesthetic or rhetorical issue - it’s a strategic one. To secure political victories that can bring about much-needed change, our liberal brothers and sisters in the U.S. must broaden the ranks. But too often, they seem preoccupied with ideological purity tests instead of building political power. The attempt to ensure “uniformity” causes harm - it pushes away moderate allies, deters potential supporters, and blocks the necessary expansion to win elections. In this way, the pursuit of justice leads to political disappointment, time and again. Since October 7th, this phenomenon has only intensified. A small, unrepresentative group has taken over liberal discourse - creating a false impression that they speak for the entire camp. This group tries to set the tone, the language, and the boundaries of who is in and who is out. The result: background noise from a minority that claims to speak for the majority, and a dynamic of exclusion instead of inclusion. That’s how someone like me - who believes in equality, justice, human rights, and the pursuit of peace - finds himself “outside the camp” just because I believe Israel has the right to defend itself. That’s how someone like me - who believes in equality, justice, human rights, and the pursuit of peace - finds himself “outside the camp” just because I believe Israel has the right to defend itself. It’s important to understand: the problem isn’t just with the content, but with the pattern itself - shrinking the camp instead of expanding it, prioritizing ideological “quality” over the “quantity” needed to win. The answer should not be a vague call for “open dialogue,” and there sure are views that have no place in liberal discourse (such as support for the expulsion of Gazans). But we need a deeper understanding that pushing out allies, even if they “aren’t 100% on the same page with us,” harms the entire liberal effort. To overcome this, we must adopt a different kind of politics, one that recognizes the value of everyone who identifies with basic liberal values - human rights, equality, and peace - and gives them a real place inside the “big tent” of the struggle. Facing a populist, unpopular, sectarian, far-right government, the Israeli public launched a determined, consistent, diverse, and cross-sector struggle - and for that reason, in many ways, it is effective In this context, Israel’s liberal protest movement is not just an interesting case - it’s a test case that we can all learn from. Facing a populist, unpopular, sectarian, far-right government, the Israeli public launched a determined, consistent, diverse, and cross-sector struggle - and for that reason, in many ways, it is effective. A pro-democracy protest outside the Knesset. My fellow American liberals, you can learn a lot from us: how to build a truly broad camp, how to deal with moral dilemmas under pressure, and how to uphold moral principles from a place of inclusion - not exclusion. If you do this, you will win twice: you’ll choose to embrace those who share your values, and gain practical tools to build a protest that can truly change reality. Oz Bin-Nun is a social justice activist and a philosophy and psychology student. He leads LIBRAEL's content team.

This newsletter was sent to LIBRAEL's mailing list. Dear friends, The story of Passover inspired the notion of freedom for billions of people. Not as a given, but as a hard-earned right. A struggle inspiring billions - Jewish and not - around the world. This year, that notion feels especially heavy. As we gather around our Seder tables, 59 Israeli hostages are still held captive in Gaza. For eighteen months they are tortured, abused, and denied basic freedoms. Their absence is an open wound in every Israeli family, and a painful reminder that true liberation is still far from reach. Countless families in Israel will gather around a Seder table with an empty chair - not for the prophet Elijah, but for their loved ones who were murdered on October 7 or died in the aftermath of the war. Too many families will have the Seder outside of their homes, as they can’t return because it is still not safe to live in the destroyed Gaza Periphery or in the Galilee. At the same time, countless Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank face their own crushing realities, stripped of security and dignity. This is not the vision of freedom we long for - on either side of the border. Or on either side of the political map. At LIBRAEL , our work was born from a fear that Israel would become a wedge issue. A political football rather than a source of shared values. We knew there was another Zionist story to tell, other than “Support Israel and Shut Up.” A story that’s liberal, committed to justice and peace, and Zionist  - fulfilling the Jewish people’s right to live free and secure. Crossing the Red Sea. We draw strength from the Exodus story because it insists that freedom is possible - even when it feels distant. Passover reminds us of the power of storytelling - not just to remember, but to renew. We draw strength from the Exodus story because it insists that freedom is possible - even when it feels distant. That’s the spirit we carry in our work. If you’re looking for deeper reflection this holiday, we invite you to explore our content page . Two recent pieces, written by two of LIBRAEL ’s volunteers, speak to this moment with particular clarity: Omer shares personal testimonies from the war in Lebanon, capturing the heartbreaking realities and cost of war; And Oz dives into the liberal protest movement in Israel - an inclusive movement that is still pushing, relentlessly, for a democratic, Jewish, and equal society. We wish you a meaningful Passover. May this holiday bring healing, and may our shared longing for liberation lead us all toward a more just and peaceful future. Am Israel Chai. Slava Ukraini. God Bless America. With respect, Rotem Oreg-Kalisky Founder and Director

Newsletter to Congress: Full Report:  The Judicial Overhaul In recent weeks, legislation to reform Israel’s judicial system has advanced, particularly the law to change the Judicial Selection Committee. On March 26, the Knesset approved an amendment, declaring that the committee will now consist of three judges, four coalition representatives (the Minister of Justice, another minister, an MK, and a legal expert chosen by the coalition), and two opposition representatives (an MK and a legal expert chosen by the opposition). The appointment of a Supreme Court judge will require the approval of at least one coalition representative and one opposition representative, effectively granting both sides veto power. On the surface, this appears to be a balanced proposal that maintains a check against government power. However, opponents argue that strengthening political influence in the committee will lead to increased politicization of the judiciary. They also warn of incentives for both the coalition and the opposition to appoint "radical" judges instead of moderates. Much of the criticism has focused on the legislative process itself, taking place during wartime without dialogue with the opposition. Moreover, former minister Yizhar Shai, one of the amendment’s initiators and an opposition-affiliated figure, withdrew his support for the amendment. Meanwhile, the government continues to avoid drafting ultra-Orthodox men into the military, leading to an increased burden on reservists. A pro-democracy protest outside the Knesset. Renewed Fighting in Gaza, Lebanon Despite the resumption of hostilities in Gaza, the fighting remains relatively low-intensity, without a large-scale ground operation. However, the IDF has taken control of the Philadelphi Corridor (the Gaza-Egypt border), the Beit Hanoun-Beit Lahia line in northern Gaza, and half of the Netzarim Corridor (separating Northern and Central Gaza Strip). While the IDF has informed the government that it has the capability to fully reconquer Gaza and impose military rule, reserve duty attendance rates are steadily declining, with some units seeing attendance drop below 50%. This presents a significant obstacle to any major ground operation. Reasons for the decline include over-deployment of soldiers (with some reservists serving over 200 and even 300 reserve days per year), resentment toward the government over the ultra-Orthodox draft exemption, the revival of judicial reforms, and uncertainty about the war’s objectives and their feasibility. In response to the fighting, indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel have resumed. Hamas has proposed releasing additional hostages - reportedly five alive and between five to ten deceased - in exchange for a 50-day ceasefire. Israel has responded with a counterproposal, demanding ten living hostages, to which Hamas refused. Meanwhile, anti-Hamas protests involving hundreds of Palestinians have erupted in Gaza, though they have yet to yield any significant change. In the north, Israel has resumed strikes deep into Lebanon, including in Hezbollah’s stronghold of the Dahieh district in Beirut, in response to rocket fire from Lebanon, which violates the ceasefire. In Jenin, in the West Bank, the IDF is focusing operations on the refugee camp east of the city, which in recent years has become a hub for armed groups, while the city itself maintains as much normalcy as possible. In addition, IDF Chief of General Staff Eyal Zamir, personally led the inquiries on extremist settler violence in the West Bank, to make sure the perpetrators are being held accountable Polls Amid the budget’s approval and the return of judicial overhaul legislation, the coalition continues to weaken in polls . It now stands at 50 seats, compared to 61 for the opposition bloc, with Arab parties holding nine seats. Additionally, polls indicate that Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party would fail to pass the electoral threshold in the next elections, leaving it out of the Knesset. If former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett decides to run - which he is expected to, since he registered a new party under the name "Bennet 2026" - the coalition’s standing would get smaller even further. In this scenario, coalition parties would drop to 44 seats, while opposition parties (including Bennet) would rise to 67, with Arab parties maintaining their nine seats. Beyond seat distribution, polling also reveals widespread dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Netanyahu: 66% of respondents disapprove of his performance, while only 31% approve. 69% believe the government is unfair toward reservists (54% of Likud voters). 64% believe the government is unfair toward hostage families (44% of Likud voters). 64% believe the government is unfair in supporting war-affected businesses. 59% believe the government is unfair in assisting displaced families and rehabilitating affected communities. 58% believe the government is unfair in handling the hostage issue.

This Op-ed was written by LIBRAEL's founder and director Rotem Oreg, and originally published on the Jerusalem Post . LIBRAEL's definition of Liberal Zionism. The Gaza war has brought devastation and pain to countless lives in Israel and in Gaza alike, as wars always do. But for one group, the conflict ignited an identity struggle as well: liberal Americans who have made Israel their home. Torn between their liberal ideals (including relations with like-minded groups in America) and their deep-rooted connection to Israel (and the pain of Israelis and Jews), they got caught in a crossfire, as both of their peer groups demanded them to “take sides.” The dilemma: Liberal values vs. supporting Israel The majority of American Jews are liberal – and despite speculations that the rising antisemitism in America will make them move to the right, 78% of them voted for former vice president Kamala Harris. For many of them, liberal values – pursuing peace, promoting justice, protecting human rights – are not negotiable. These principles are integral to who they are and often are derived from their Jewish identity. The choice of many liberal American Jews to live in Israel shows equally powerful commitment – not just believing in the Jewish people’s right to have their own nation-state but also being willing to take a part in its building. To many of them, Israel is more than a home – it is a part of their identity. This is true even – one might say, especially – as Israelis elect governments that are as far from liberal values as possible. The Gaza war has intensified the challenge of maintaining both commitments. Liberal Americans in Israel are not blind to the tragic human toll in Gaza: civilian casualties, displacement, and destruction. Many of them, like many Israelis, believe that the war is taking too long, has lost its original purposes of bringing back the hostages and removing the threat of Hamas, and is now serving political needs. On the other hand, like all Israelis and Jews around the world, they experience the nightmarish reality of enemy rockets targeting Israeli cities; they fear for Israeli soldiers and for the remaining hostages who are still in Hamas’s hands; and they learn from their friends and families in America about the frightening rise in antisemitism. Most liberal Americans have never been presented with a compelling, up-to-date pro-Israel progressive narrative The ‘big lie’: Liberalism and Zionism are mutually exclusive This isn’t new; it’s a new manifestation of a broader problem. Over the years, a “big lie” has taken root in the American Left, suggesting that support for Israel and liberal values are like oil and water – they just don’t go together. In some progressive circles, Israel is often cast as the oppressor, thus inherently opposed to liberal values. In these spaces, Zionism is equated with colonialism, and expressing support for Israel can result in accusations of supporting its policies. This binary framing is both false and dangerous. It ignores the fact that one can be a wholehearted patriot and believe that one’s beloved country is going in the wrong direction (as most Democrats in America feel right now). In the Israeli case, it erases the lived experiences of living in a country grappling with profound challenges and paying enormous prices, as we all witnessed on October 7 and since. It disregards the aspirations of Israelis who strive for life alongside the Palestinians – yes, even after October 7 – while living under constant threat. And it marginalizes those – like pro-Israel liberal Americans – who refuse to accept that their values must come at the expense of their identity or vice versa. “Liberal Zionists” – people who support Israel’s right to exist and defend itself while also supporting Palestinian self-determination and human rights. Needed: A pro-Israel progressive vision The heart of the problem lies in the fact that there is a vacuum: Most liberal Americans have never been presented with a compelling, up-to-date pro-Israel progressive narrative (and no, I’m not talking about the “Start-Up Nation, cherry tomatoes, only democracy in the Middle East” narrative). For years, much of the discourse around Israel in the United States has been dominated by one-sided narratives. On one side, there’s a hawkish narrative that prioritizes security above all, sometimes ignoring Palestinian suffering, and protects Israel at all costs while putting all the blame on “the other side, ” whether that’s the Palestinians, the UN, the international media, or even the Israeli Left. On the other side, there’s a radical narrative that puts all the blame on Israel, holding it accountable to unequivocal moral standards in a way that ignores its legitimate security concerns, and sometimes even describing its existence as the nation-state of the Jewish people to a historical error that must be amended. This binary excludes those we in LIBRAEL refer to as “liberal Zionists” – people who support Israel’s right to exist and defend itself while also supporting Palestinian self-determination and human rights. According to our definition of Zionism, which is based on the writings of Israel’s founding fathers, Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people – just like any other people – deserve to live in a democratic, secure, and prosperous nation-state. Liberal Zionism is merely the belief that Zionism is not at the expense of anyone else. Ze'ev Jabotinsky (left) and Theodor Herzl, Israel's founding fathers. LIBRAEL's definition of Zionism is based on their writings. Liberal Americans living in Israel are usually liberal Zionists, even if they don’t think of themselves as such. They would not have chosen Israel to be their home had they believed it goes against everything they believe in; they would not have abandoned their commitment to peace, justice, and human rights had they thought those jeopardized Israel’s security. Yet, like other liberal Zionists in the US, their voices are often lost in the cacophony of extremism, leaving them isolated, misunderstood, and even gaslighted: “You can be either a liberal or a Zionist, not both.” Reject the notion that supporting Israel requires turning a blind eye to its flaws or that struggling for liberal values means jeopardizing Israel’s security. The personal toll Living at this intersection of identities comes at a price. Liberal Americans in Israel face criticism from all sides. Back in the US, their liberal allies sometimes label them as complicit in Israel’s actions – thus, allegedly, supporting Israel’s policy and government – simply for choosing to live there. Meanwhile, in Israel their progressive stances on issues like settlement expansion, hope for peace with the Palestinians, and the mounting death toll in Gaza make them targets of criticism and even hostility. Liberal Americans who live in Israel – just like their counterparts overseas – are not willing to abandon either of their identity components. They reject the notion that supporting Israel requires turning a blind eye to its flaws or that struggling for liberal values means jeopardizing Israel’s security. But in a world that increasingly demands ideological purity, their position is a lonely one. Luckily, that’s going to change. Toward a new narrative To address this struggle, we need to dismantle the “big lie” and introduce a new narrative – one that acknowledges Israel’s challenging reality and affirms that liberal values and Zionism can coexist. This narrative must begin by recognizing that Israel is flawed – like all other democracies – but not to hide behind that. Instead, it should emphasize the ongoing efforts of Israelis toward making Israel a better place, among which are the efforts to uphold ideals of human rights and justice under extraordinary circumstances, the likes of which no other Western country faces. Even in the post-October 7 reality, such a liberal Zionist narrative must also acknowledge the need for a secure, just, and lasting resolution to the conflict, which must be pursued with caution, eyes wide open, and feet on the ground. This is crucial: we can shout “They don’t want peace” all we want, but no one in liberal America will be convinced. No American liberal will believe “Israel wants peace” if we ignore the other side; and no American liberal will even consider thinking about themselves as Zionists merely by mentioning the hi-tech industry or the thriving LGBTQ+ community. Such a narrative would dismantle the binaries that dominate the Israel discourse, first by offering a space where liberal Americans who support Israel can feel at home both in their values and in their support for Israel. Next, it would empower them to advocate for security, peace, and justice, without fear of being branded as traitors. The larger challenge The Gaza war exposed the ideological struggles of liberal Americans in Israel. But this is not just a personal struggle; it’s a mere example of a larger challenge, affecting the future of the US-Israel relations. Bridging the divide between liberal values and support for Israel is essential, as we must keep Israel a bipartisan issue in the United States. Liberal Americans in Israel are not giving up on their liberalism, nor are they giving up on Israel. They are living proof that the “big lie” is just that – a lie.

Newsletter to Congress: Top 4: The Hostage Deal: Israel and Hamas agreed on a two-phase ceasefire deal for the release of Israeli hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. IDF Chief of General Staff Resignation: Herzi Halevi announced his resignation, citing failures in preparing for the October 7 attack, with discussions on his successor underway. West Bank Unrest and Jenin Operation: The IDF’s operation in Jenin dismantled terror infrastructure, while settler violence in Al-Funduq escalated tensions. Ben-Gvir Resignation: Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir resigned over the ceasefire deal, leaving the coalition with a narrow majority but open to rejoining if fighting resumes. Full Report:  1. The Hostage Deal: A ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas was signed, which includes a deal for the return of Israeli hostages from Gaza. The agreement is divided into two phases: in the first phase, lasting 42 days, children, women, the elderly, the injured, and the female observers soldiers from Nahal Oz (a total of 33 hostages) are to be released - seven of whom have been released so far.  In the second phase, all remaining hostages are to be freed. In exchange, Israel will release hundreds of prisoners, some of whom were convicted of life sentences for violent activities that claimed the lives of many Israelis. The deal was mediated by the outgoing Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration and despite criticism in the far right enjoys the support of most Israelis. The released hostages Liri Albeg (top right), Karina Ariev (top left), Naama Levy (bottom left), and Daniella Gilboa (bottom right) united with their parent after 477 days. Their parents mentioned they were starved, held in solitude, and were not even allowed to cry. 2. Resignation of the IDF Chief of General Staff and Successor Discussions: IDF Chief of General Staff Herzi Halevi announced on Tuesday that he would end his tenure at the beginning of March, citing failures in warning and preparing the military for the October 7 attack. Halevi is the highest-ranking Israeli official to take responsibility for the failure and act on it, though his resignation comes over 15 months after the incident. Defense Minister Israel Katz, a political ally of Prime Minister Netanyahu, is expected to appoint Halevi's replacement in the coming weeks. Katz has interviewed three candidates: outgoing Deputy Chief of Staff Amir Baram, who criticized Halevi for the war’s stagnation; Defense Ministry Director-General Eyal Zamir, a former military secretary to Netanyahu considered close to him; and former Ground Forces Commander Tamir Yadai, whose appointment is seen as unlikely. 3. Unrest in the West Bank and the Operation in Jenin:  The IDF launched "Operation Iron Wall" in the city of Jenin in Samaria to dismantle Hamas  infrastructure. Over 15 operatives from various organizations, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, were killed, and significant military equipment intended for use by the groups was seized. However, a two-year-old girl was reportedly injured during clashes with militants and tragically died from her wounds. The IDF, which claims it only targeted enemy combatants, is investigating the incident. Meanwhile, dozens of settlers stormed the Palestinian village of Al-Funduq in Samaria, reportedly burning buildings, vehicles, and agricultural equipment. Police and soldiers called to the scene to stop the violence were attacked by settlers with tear gas and responded with live fire, resulting in two settlers being injured. 4. Ben-Gvir Resignation: The ceasefire agreement caused divisions within the Israeli coalition and government. Ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, and their parties announced their opposition to any deal involving a ceasefire and halting the fighting in Gaza, even threatening to resign if such an agreement was signed. After the ceasefire and hostage deal were finalized, Ben-Gvir announced that he and his party (Otzma Yehudit) were resigning from the government and coalition, leaving the coalition with 63 Knesset seats but clarifying they would not support efforts to dissolve the government and enact election.  Ben-Gvir stated that he would be willing to return to the government if it decided to resume fighting in Gaza. For now, the three ministerial portfolios previously held by Otzma Yehudit (National Security, Heritage, and Development of the Negev and Galilee) have been temporarily transferred to Tourism Minister Haim Katz of the Likud, in case Otzma Yehudit decides to rejoin the government.

Newsletter to Congress: Top 4: Hostage Deal on the Brink: Violations, Delays, and Bombings Keep the Deal Fragile Trump’s Plan Gains Israeli Support, Just As Any Other Plan Would Poll: Netanyahu Still Loses Re-election, Bennett Keeps Power; Vast Backing for Hostage Deal "Qatargate" Scandal: Netanyahu Aides Accused of Promoting Qatar’s Interests Full Report:  1. The Hostage Deal on the Verge of Crisis Over the past month, the hostage release and ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas have faced a crisis. Statements by President Donald Trump, warning that "hell will break loose" unless all hostages are released, were seen by the Israeli right as an opportunity to resume the fighting, jeopardizing the continuation of releases. However, the fighting did not ultimately resume. Hamas' violations - particularly the return of an unidentified Palestinian woman's body instead of that of Israeli hostage Shiri Bibas, as well as the bombing of five buses in central Israel (which by luck exploded at night) - were perceived as breaches of the agreement. In response, Israel announced it would delay the release of the next group of Palestinian prisoners, which Hamas claims is a violation, though it has still refrained from escalating the situation further. In the past month, 18 Israeli hostages and five Thai hostages were released alive. Additionally, the bodies of eight hostages who were kidnapped alive on October 7 but later murdered by Hamas were returned, including 83-year-old peace activist Oded Lifshitz, 32-year-old educator Shiri Bibas, and her two children—four-year-old Ariel and nine-month-old Kfir. Left to right: Oded Lifshitz, Ariel Bibas, Kfir Bibas, and Shiri Bibas RIP. Autopsy showed that Ariel and Kfir were strangled to death in November 2023. 2. President Trump's Gaza Vision On the surface, the Israeli public's reaction to President Donald Trump’s transfer idea has been overwhelmingly positive. Polls show broad support across the political spectrum, reaching up to 72% approval. Positive reactions from right-wing politicians further reinforce this perception. However, two aspects need to be addressed. First, the Israeli public is desperate for any solution. The recurring cycles of violence and their human cost have created a strong desire for decisive action that will "make it stop." This sentiment is reinforced by the growing opposition to “managing the conflict” in the same manner as before—an approach associated with Benjamin Netanyahu. Therefore, Israeli support for Trump’s plan can be understood as a desire for an active and sustainable resolution, as well as opposition to the current status quo. This is also reflected in the willingness of 60% of Israelis (as indicated in an Accord Institute poll) to engage in a political process that could lead to a two-state solution. While the two approaches may seem opposed, both stem from Israelis’ desire for a solution. The second point to consider is how Trump’s decisiveness affects Netanyahu. On one hand, it strengthens Netanyahu's image as a statesman, allowing him to make promises of deporting Palestinians to his political base. On the other hand, it casts him as a hesitant leader compared to Trump’s proactive and even aggressive approach. We at LIBRAEL were very clear: anyone who wants to leave Gaza should be allowed to, but forcibly displacing people is both morally deplorable and practically impossible. 3. Polls and Public Opinion The current coalition has seen a slight rise in a recent election poll , now standing at 52 seats. Likud remains the largest party, polling between 22 and 25 seats. However, projections still indicate that if elections were held today, the anti-Netanyahu opposition bloc would win and form a government. According to the polls, opposition parties (Yisrael Beiteinu, Yesh Atid, National Unity, the Democrats, and Ra'am) would secure 62 seats, coalition parties 52, and the Arab party Hadash-Ta’al 6 seats. If former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett were to form a new party, he would receive the highest number of seats (24, compared to Likud’s 21 under Netanyahu). However, most of his support would come at the expense of opposition parties - his political anti-Netanyahu allies. In a scenario where Bennett enters the race, Yisrael Beiteinu would drop from 16 seats to 10, the Democrats from 12 to 9, the National Unity Party from 17 to 9, and Yesh Atid from 13 to 10. Additionally, the poll shows overwhelming public support (70%) for continuing the hostage deal, with a preference for the next phase of releases to occur in a single round. 4. "Qatargate" In recent months, revelations have emerged about three senior advisers to Prime Minister Netanyahu who provided public relations services to companies promoting Qatar’s interests. The most notable figure among them is Ari Feldstein, Netanyahu’s spokesperson for military affairs, who is suspected of leaking classified documents. (this comes after he was hired for the role without a security clearance.) Alongside him, spokesmen Yonatan Urich and Srulik Einhorn operated, via private firms, a campaign aimed at improving Qatar’s global image and downplaying its support for terrorism. The prime minister and his advisers deny the allegations. This controversy unfolds amid harsh criticism in Israel against Qatar for funding Hamas (with Netanyahu’s approval and encouragement) and hosting the group’s senior leadership. The Shin Bet is expected to launch an investigation, though this move has been met with attacks from the coalition, which claims the agency has a conflict of interest due to its role in the failures of October 7.

Newsletter to Congress: Top 4: 1. Netanyahu and Levin moves to dismiss Attorney General Baharav-Miara and Shin Bet Chief Bar, in an attempt to remove checks on their power and avoiding accountability for corruption. 2. Israel is reacting rather than leading in Gaza hostage negotiations, with delays suggesting hostage recovery is not the government’s top priority, contrary to the people's will. 3. Israel balances force and diplomacy - maintaining a hardline stance in Syria while signaling openness to negotiations and normalization with Lebanon. 4. New IDF Chief Eyal Zamir declaring 2025 “a year of war” and implied the government must draft Ultra-Orthodox men. Full Report:  1. Dismissal of the Attorney General and Head of Shin Bet Justice Minister Yariv Levin has resumed promoting the judicial overhaul laws that sparked massive protests across Israel in recent years. Levin’s major decision is his announcement earlier this month that he has initiated dismissal proceedings against Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, claiming her conduct toward the government is “adversarial” and “inappropriate.” This move has drawn widespread criticism from the opposition and protest groups, who argue that Levin aims to remove any checks and balances on governmental power. Notably, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar - who appointed Baharav-Miara during his tenure as justice minister in the Bennett-Lapid government and whose party formally merged with Likud last week - supports her dismissal. Simultaneously, Prime Minister Netanyahu informed the Head of the Shin Bet (Israel’s Security Service) Ronen Bar that a vote on his dismissal will be held in the coming week. The official reason is Bar’s responsibility for the October 7 failure, but it is worth noting that the Shin Bet is currently investigating three senior aides in Netanyahu’s office over suspicions of receiving funds from Qatar, possibly as a bribe. Adding to the tensions, Bar’s predecessor, Nadav Argaman, stated in an interview on Thursday that he possesses damaging information on Netanyahu and would reveal it “if Netanyahu acts unlawfully.” This has further politicized the Israeli Shin Bet and contributed to the tension between the security establishment (associated with the opposition) and the government. It is important to note that the dismissal process for both officials is lengthy: removing Baharav-Miara requires the establishment of a special committee to make a recommendation, followed by a government decision, which the Supreme Court is likely to freeze for months; and removing Bar requires an official recommendation by an independent committee. Gali Baharav-Miara (left) and Ronen Bar. Dismissing them will require decision by committees, not just the government. 2. Deadlock in Gaza Negotiations While the Trump administration continues efforts to secure the release of more hostages from Gaza, Israel is perceived as being dragged into the process rather than leading it - despite the ongoing de facto ceasefire. Supported by President Trump’s calls to “open the gates of hell” on Gaza, Israel has announced measures to cut electricity and water supplies to Gaza and to halt humanitarian aid deliveries as leverage against Hamas, but it will take time for these actions to translate into real pressure, as Hamas has stockpiled emergency reserves of food and water. Meanwhile, Hamas has agreed to a Qatari proposal to release American hostage Idan Alexander and four deceased hostages, but the Israeli government has been slow to accept the deal. This delay signals that hostage recovery is not the government’s top priority, contrary to broad public sentiment, including among coalition voters. Iden Alexander, from his Hamas-released video, calling President Trump to push for his release. 3. IDF Operations Israel has adopted a relatively dovish approach toward Lebanon. While holding onto the five enclaves beyond the Israeli border and tactically attacking several Hezbollah assets, it has also initiated negotiations on the future border with Lebanon and released several Lebanese prisoners, including at least one Hezbollah fighter, as a goodwill gesture. Additionally, hints have been leaked suggesting openness to normalizing relations with Lebanon. In contrast, Israel maintains a hardline stance in Syria, vowing to prevent the presence of armed forces south of Damascus. The objective is to establish a buffer zone near its border and protect Syria’s Druze population. To that end, Israel continues to carry out precise strikes across Syria to ensure its strategic superiority against the new regime. 4. Appointment of the New IDF Chief of General Staff At the beginning of the month, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi officially resigned as IDF Chief of General Staff, following through on his earlier declaration that he would step down out of personal responsibility for the military’s failure on October 7. His successor, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, has announced that 2025 will be “a year of war” and has already begun updating battle plans for Gaza, alongside plans to establish new armored and infantry brigades. In his inauguration speech, Zamir called on all sectors of Israeli society to take part in the mission of national defense - a statement that could be interpreted as a call to draft ultra-Orthodox men at a time when the IDF is suffering from manpower shortages, particularly among combat troops, and as the government is pushing for a “draft law” that will exempt them from military service. Zamir, who previously served as Netanyahu’s military secretary and was his preferred candidate for the role in both 2019 and 2022, is viewed by parts of the opposition as a Netanyahu loyalist and has therefore been met with some skepticism. Eyal Zamir. Despite being labeled as a Netanyahu Loyalist, he implied that the government must draft Ultra-Orthodox men.

This Op-ed was written by LIBRAEL's founder and director Rotem Oreg , and originally published on Ma'ariv. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. Did not understand he's no longer the U.S.'s favorite son. Even Ukraine’s staunchest supporters, including ourselves - those who believe there is no cause more just than its war against Russia’s invasion and Putin’s war crimes - could agree: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky emerged from his White House meeting with President Trump as morally right but not politically wise. Many Israelis overlook the most basic rule of diplomacy: it’s not what you say that matters most, but how you say it. Zelensky misread the room. He did not understand that even though he’s right, he is no longer the U.S.’s favorite son. Instead, the White House sees him as someone receiving military aid for an endless war - someone who now has to justify himself. Zelensky’s mistake is not unique to him. In fact, it characterizes another country - one that is also a pro-Western democracy fighting for its survival against an enemy determined to destroy it: Israel. Like Zelensky, we Israelis assume that because we are mostly right, and because the truth is usually on our side, we can convince the world of our righteousness if we insist on it enough in the international arena. Many Israelis overlook the most basic rule of diplomacy: it’s not what you say that matters most, but how you say it. This mistake runs through every layer of Israel’s diplomatic efforts - from diplomats and politicians meeting their Western counterparts to secure more credit for resuming military operations, to social media activists and campus advocates determined to “fight for the truth.” In a post-truth world dominated by social media, facts - such as the fact that Ukraine was invaded without provocation or justification, or that Israel is fighting a murderous, war-crimes-committing organization seeking to wipe it off the map - matter less. Thoughts, beliefs, opinions, emotions, and worldviews - however subjective - carry far more weight. Anyone seeking to persuade must take these into account and tailor their message accordingly. If we want to convince progressives of our cause, we need to start speaking their language. Some supporters of Israel may take comfort in the Trump administration, which gives Israel almost total freedom of action in Gaza. But we must not lose sight of the bigger picture: in the media, academia, civil society, and growing segments of the Democratic Party, the attitude toward Israel increasingly mirrors how the Republican Party views Ukraine: The war’s circumstances?  “We don’t support invasion or mass murder, but let’s not forget that ‘there’s context.’” Its duration?  “Ukraine/Israel can’t fight forever - they need to ‘end the war.’” Military aid?  “Ukraine/Israel receives billions in military assistance from us, and we demand accountability for how our money is spent.” Add to this the domestic political context. According to a Gallup poll, the gap between Republican support for Israel (83%) and Democratic support for Israel (33%) has never been wider - it is the largest partisan gap in support for any country. Ukraine faces a similar but opposite trend: 84% of Democrats support Ukraine, compared to just 54% of Republicans. Support for Israel (or Ukraine) has become a partisan issue, associated with Republicans (or Democrats). President Trump is in no rush to help Ukraine after seeing how President Biden and the Democrats rallied behind it; a future Democratic president may well do the same to Israel for a similar reason. U.S. Adults' view of different countries, by party, according to Gallup. American politics is cyclical, and control of the White House and Congress tends to shift every few years. Even though Republican support for Israel may seem rock solid right now, it would be a strategic mistake to ignore the looming political turnover. It is likely that a future Democratic president will be less patient and less committed to Israel than Joe Biden. The diplomatic approach of “fighting for the truth” and “letting the facts speak for themselves” may earn applause in pro-Israel circles. But unfortunately, the truth or the facts don’t really matter - insisting on them may energize the base, but it alienates the undecideds, not to mention pushes away the skeptics. And let’s not lie to ourselves: not everyone who challenges Israel hates it or “loves Hamas.” Most simply question the importance of supporting Israel or the justice of its cause - and they aren’t going anywhere. So what’s the solution? If we want to convince progressives of our cause, we need to start speaking their language. We must use their concepts, their moral rhetoric, to make a pro-Israel case in a way that won’t shut them down completely - just as President Trump and Vice President Vance shut down when confronted with Zelensky’s arguments. This means, for example, not denying the tragedy unfolding in Gaza - we don’t want to be perceived as heartless monsters. Not justifying every decision Israel makes - so that we don’t sound like North Korean propagandists. Not rushing to cold, hard facts -such as the statistic that the combatant-to-civilian kill ratio in Gaza is the “best” in the history of wars against terrorist organizations. Diplomacy is not a debate - it is the art of winning hearts and minds. And I emphasized: hearts and minds, in that order. Last month, I returned from a speaking tour across the U.S. with LIBRAEL . During this tour, I led “How to Speak Progressive” workshops for hundreds of students, high schoolers, community leaders, and pro-Israel activists nationwide. At every workshop, someone would ask how we can win a debate without relying on facts. And in every workshop, I answered: Diplomacy is not a debate - it is the art of winning hearts and minds.  And I emphasized: hearts and minds, in that order.

The released hostages Liri Albeg, Karina Ariev, Daniela Gilboa, and Naama Levi unite with their families. They shared that they were starved, deprived of sunlight and fresh air for months. A Ceasefire and Hostage Release in Gaza LIBRAEL welcomes the long-awaited hostage release and ceasefire deal, bringing much-needed relief to the families of Emily Damari, Romi Gonen, Doron Steinbrecher, Liri Albeg, Naama Levy, Daniela Gilboa, Karina Ariev, Agam Berger, Arbel Yahud, Gadi Mozes, Ofer Kalderon, Keith Siegal, and Yarden Bibas - and a beacon of hope for the families of the remaining hostages. While the deal requires difficult compromises, including the release of Palestinian prisoners convicted of murder, it underscores the importance of pursuing every opportunity to save lives and restore stability in the region. This moment calls for unity among all who hope for a brighter future, as we look forward to the release of the remaining hostages. Humanitarian Aid Can Weaken Hamas Alongside its challenges, the ceasefire presents an urgent opportunity to flood Gaza with humanitarian aid, addressing the dire needs of its people.  By allowing massive amounts of food and medicine to go into Gaza, Israel and the international community can create a supply so massive that it undermines Hamas’s ability to steal and exploit aid for its own purposes. This could prevent aid from being oversold or diverted, thus empowering Hamas and further worsening conditions for Gaza’s civilian population. Check out the latest video by Rotem Oreg, LIBRAEL ’s founder and director, addressing the out-of-touch calls for Israel to make peace with Hamas—and why there is still hope for peace.

A friend from college died in the Gaza war. I’ve been to way too many funerals than a person my age should attend. I jump with anxiety every time I hear the siren of an ambulance. I hear people around me saying they can’t finish the day without a glass or two. More than one friend of mine who’s about to study abroad is having second thoughts because of the rising antisemitism on campuses. This is not an attempt to undermine or overlook Palestinian suffering. The pain and tragedy Gazans continue to go through since October 7 are unspeakable, and my heart goes out to the Palestinian civilians. But October 7 is a trauma for every Israeli, and I use the word “trauma” on purpose. There’s a link between the psychological and the geopolitical. Until the war, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was largely ignored by most Israelis. A false sense of security and fierce debates on other issues (church-and-state, judicial legislation, corruption) enabled Israelis to look the other way. However, October 7 made the conflict impossible to ignore. The murder of over 1,200 Israelis, the kidnapping of 251, the 250,000 Israeli refugees who fled the Gaza envelope and the Galilee, and the fact that almost on a daily basis soldiers keep dying in Gaza, are too heavy of a price that every Israeli pays. That trauma’s influence on geopolitics can be called Catch 10/7. As the international community says that a two-state solution is the only path to peace, most Israelis, even from the left, hear “price to terrorism”. Calls from the world to provide aid perceived as demands to “assist the enemy”. The U.S.’s demand to make sure civilians are protected during combat is interpreted as “America doesn’t want us to win”. However, at the same time, when the radical right in Israel (who’s represented in the coalition) calls to seize the “historic” opportunity and resettle Gaza, most Israelis, including on the right, know that resettling Gaza means an endless, pointless war, with hundreds of avoidable casualtiesת Palestinian and Israeli. And so, Israel is stuck in the gravest moment of its history: we don’t want to make concessions, we don’t want to re-occupy Gaza, and we can’t just keep turning a blind eye to the ongoing conflict. So, how do we move from here? A good first step could be adopting the “Ceasefire Triangle”,  the three objectives that from Israel’s perspective are crucial in order to end the war. One is the immediate return of all the hostages,  which 72% of Israelis support ending the war in order to make that happen. The released hostages share unspeakable, atrocious human rights violations. They must return.  Second, is ensuring Hamas is dismantled.  This is not a maximalist approach that seeks killing or capturing every Hamas militant in Gaza, and it does not involve permanent military presence in Gaza. It is about dismantling its military and governing capabilities, making sure Hamas has no future, as it is posing a threat to Israelis, to Palestinians, and it is also the largest obstacle to peace. Third, is creating a long-term reconstruction process in the Palestinian society.  The fact that Hamas was elected in 2006 doesn’t mean that all Gazans support it; but the group does enjoy a good deal of popular support. We must dismantle the social institutions that glorified violence against Israelis (the reform in the textbooks in the UAE is a good model) and replace them with pro-coexistence institutions. Founded four years ago, LIBRAEL  is promoting just that: advocating for Israeli interests, in a way that is compatible with liberal values. We know that supporting a secure, prosperous, democratic nation-state for the Jewish people and that believing in freedom, justice, and human rights are far from mutually exclusive. The Ceasefire Triangle  is proof of that. Adopting it would ensure the enormous prices we are paying are not in vain.

(By Bar Shamrish) Yesterday morning, the alarms blared once more. As an Israeli, it wasn’t the first time I had heard them, but this time, they struck a deeper chord—exactly as they had a year ago on October 7th, 2023.   On that day, I woke up to a nightmare—a day unlike any I had ever experienced in this country. It was a day of fear, shock, and awe, a deadly surprise that forever changed us. All of us were glued to our screens, searching for answers and explanations. What we found were images of horror, stories that are so gut-wrenching they’re hard to believe, as the nightmare unfolded before us. Hundreds of Hamas militants broke through the Gaza border, storming Israeli towns and communities. They slaughtered civilians indiscriminately—men, women, children, and even the elderly. Entire families were massacred in their homes. Some burned alive. Young children were taken hostage or murdered in front of their parents. Kibbutzim, where families thought they were safe, became scenes of unimaginable bloodshed. The images of those atrocities—bodies of young children wrapped in bloodied blankets, parents shielding their children in their final moments—seared into our collective consciousness.   Yesterday felt different. It was as though we had stepped into an all-new Memorial Day, but this one was filled with raw, unhealed wounds. Stories of that bloody Saturday flooded the airwaves, like that of the mother who hid her children in the closet while blood-thirsty murderers tried to break into their safe room. Or the “about to retire, too old for this” police officer who cleared his neighborhood of gunmen with just his personal gun and sheer courage. The heroic reservists who left behind their partners and children, donned their fatigues, went to save our country, and never returned.   Horrible videos that Hamas themselves published showed bodies mutilated beyond recognition, with Hamas fighters celebrating the brutalities they committed. The most disturbing videos showed members of Hamas dragging civilians out of their homes, executing them in the streets, and desecrating their remains. Footage emerged of kidnapped civilians—men, women, children, even babies—being paraded through Gaza as trophies, with crowds cheering. The explicit hatred was like nothing we had ever seen, and it left our nation reeling.   As if the horror of the massacre wasn’t enough, something equally disturbing unfolded in parts of the West. In the days following the attack, massive pro-Hamas - not to be identified as pro-Palestinian - protests erupted across major cities in Western countries. Some of these protests were overt in their support for the actions of Hamas, glorifying violence as “resistance” and justifying the slaughter, kidnapping, and abuse of innocent Israeli civilians. At universities across Europe and North America, particularly in the U.S., pro-Palestinian encampments appeared - and while some legitimately called for freedom and peace for Palestinians, no insignificant numbers of students and faculty held rallies that bordered on outright support for the violent actions of Hamas. Posters of kidnapped Israeli civilians were torn down, and slogans like “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” echoed on campuses—a slogan that means that Israel should be dismantled and Israelis should be displaced. Even more shocking was the silence, or worse, the tacit approval from some of the academic institutions themselves. Free speech and the right to protest, of course, must be protected. Still, when that speech turns into open advocacy for violence or denying the self-determination of a group of people, it forces us to ask difficult questions about the lens in which certain groups in the West observe this conflict.   An anti-Israel protester ripping down posters of Hamas hostages (left) and anti-Israel protesters in Baltimore City (right) (TND/Gary Collins).   A year later, the sorrow is immense, the pain unbearable. Millions of Palestinians are suffering enormously - injured, displaced, and killed - from the war that Hamas has brought upon them. The presence of Hamas militants and arms within civilian population is another factor contributing to the Palestinian suffering, as it is clear that the leaders of Hamas could not care less about their actions’ implications on the people they claim to lead. Their constant refusal to temporary ceasefires that will feel the Gaza strip with aid is a major factor in the dire shortage of food and medicine.  Yet, within this tragedy, something remarkable happened: we stood up. We pushed back. In the face of chaos and death, ordinary citizens banded together to uplift and serve one another. They filled the ranks of those who had fallen and supported those who lost almost everything. A nation of lions, shaken to its core yet resilient when it mattered most.   There’s a saying in Judaism from the sages, Chazal: “All of Israel is responsible for one another.” Since that tragic Saturday, it has felt like a living truth here in Israel. People of every background—Jews and Arabs, religious and secular, members of the LGBTQ+ community and those who are not, Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mizrahi, and Ethiopian Jews—have sought each other’s well-being, offering help, comfort, and healing.   This unity gave me hope for the country I love. It deepened my Zionist identity - the simple belief that Jews must be able to live free in their own democratic state - and forced me to confront uncomfortable truths about my own perspectives. I began to understand what Golda Meir meant, as President Biden later echoed when she said, “We have no place to go.” It wasn’t merely a statement of geographic limitation but a testament to our strength, unity, and determination that defines our people. Our true power lies not just in our history or our land but in our solidarity with one another—that unique blueprint of the Israeli spirit.   A year has passed since October 7th, 2023, and we have yet to rise fully from the “Shiva” of that day. Despite the passage of time and the rallying cry that emerged from every corner of this nation, the wounds are deep, and the scars will linger. But we must never lose hope. As the French author François de La Rochefoucauld wrote: “Hope is the last thing that dies in man; and though it be exceedingly deceitful, yet it is of this good use to us, that while we are traveling through life, it conducts us in an easier and more pleasant way to our journey’s end.”   We, the eternal Jewish people, must cling to hope.   The hope is that one day, Israelis and Palestinians will realize that only through peaceful coexistence could an Israeli state and a Palestinian state live side by side and end once and for all the bloodshed. But it has to come from both sides, from true recognition by the other group. That the abolishment of Israel, or a one-state solution, is the antithesis of it - but also rejecting Palestinian desire for self-determination is.    Though our journey is long, hope lights our way.

Newsletter to Congress: As Israel marks the anniversary of the October 7 Massacre, Israelis are being attacked by both Hezbolláh and Iran; Hostage release and a ceasefire, however, seem less likely than ever Top 5: 1. Israeli Action in Lebanon:   In response to the escalating threat posed by Hezbollah, the IDF has taken more proactive steps, including targeted assassinations of Hezbollah leadership and ground maneuvers in Lebanon to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1701. 2. Iranian Missile Response:   After Israel’s operations significantly weakened Hezbollah, Iran retaliated by launching 182 ballistic missiles toward Israeli cities, most of which were intercepted through combined efforts of Israel, the U.S., and Jordan, with minimal casualties. 3. Stalled Negotiations:   Negotiations for a hostage deal and ceasefire have seen little progress, exacerbated by declining media attention and the belief that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar has gone underground and is uninterested in any deal. 4. Renewed Hamas Activity in Gaza:   Hamas has reorganized in humanitarian areas of Gaza, leading to Israeli ground operations in Jabalia and an expansion of security corridors in Gaza, yet an Israeli long-term strategy for Gaza’s governance post-Hamas remains unclear. 5. Gideon Sa’ar Joins the Coalition:   Gideon Sa’ar has entered the Netanyahu-led coalition. Although he did not secure the Defense Minister role, his presence reduces Itamar Ben-Gvir’s influence and positions him to negotiate independently on key votes. Full Report:  The Northern Front: In light of the threat Hezbollah poses to the residents of northern Israel, who were forced to flee their homes in October 2023 due to fears of a Hezbollah invasion, Israel has begun to take more active measures on the northern front over the past two weeks. This is based on the assessment that merely a diplomatic agreement will not succeed in distancing Hezbollah from the border. These actions include a series of targeted killings of the organization's leadership, including the assassination of the organization's secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah, following the explosion of Hezbollah's beepers. Israel's activities escalated further this week when it initiated a ground maneuver within Lebanese territory to force Hezbollah to withdraw from the Israeli border and beyond the Litani River, thereby enforcing UN Security Council Resolution 1701 from 2006. In response to Israel's actions, which significantly weakened Hezbollah's power, Iran launched 182 ballistic missiles towards Israeli population centers. Most of the missiles were intercepted through the combined efforts of Israel, the U.S., and Jordan, causing no casualties except for the death of a Palestinian civilian in Jericho. The Israeli government has already announced that it will respond to the Iranian aggression, but it has not yet declared how it intends to do so.  The Palestinian Front: No significant progress has been made in the negotiations for a hostage deal and ceasefire, against the backdrop of decreased media coverage in Israel and the U.S. assessment that Sinwar has gone underground and is not interested in a deal. Simultaneously, various media outlets report that Israel is considering an offer to exile Sinwar to South Sudan in exchange for a hostage deal and ceasefire. Additionally, security officials estimate that the fighting in the north and the ground maneuver could impact a ceasefire in the south and the hostage deal. However, Israel is not inclined to advance such an agreement, also due to operational achievements. In the Gaza Strip, Hamas has reorganized in humanitarian areas, prompting the IDF to launch a ground operation in Jabalia with a raid on the neighborhood. Additionally, the IDF decided to expand the Netzarim corridor, which bisects Gaza, to deepen its security hold. Before the operation, many steps were taken to prevent harm to civilian populations, and they were called to evacuate the neighborhoods where the IDF would enter, alongside air force strikes on Hamas militants who had established themselves in a UNRWA humanitarian area. It is evident that in many places from which the IDF previously withdrew, Hamas has reorganized as residents returned to the area. This is due to the fact that the Israeli government still lacks a clear strategy for “the day after” and for finding a governing alternative to Hamas. The Political Front: MK Gideon Sa'ar is joining the coalition led by Benjamin Netanyahu with his National Right party, though without a coalition agreement except for a position in the security cabinet and a minister without portfolio role. This move expands the coalition from 64 to 68 seats, neutralizes the veto power of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and increases the likelihood that the coalition will survive politically until the end of 2026, the original election date. Gideon Sa'ar is considered hawkish on security matters but relatively liberal on social and religious issues. For many years, there was animosity between him and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu due to Sa'ar's statements that Netanyahu acts out of personal motives only. However, since October 7 and the outbreak of the war, relations between the two have tightened, culminating in his official entry into the government. Critics of Sa'ar argue that this is a cynical political move meant to secure him a position, while supporters claim that Sa'ar will be able to steer government policy in a more hawkish direction and limit Ben-Gvir’s influence. It is noted that Sa'ar entered without securing his initial demand to be appointed Defense Minister in place of Yoav Gallant, another political rival of Netanyahu. This fact is a disadvantage for him but also an advantage, as he is not currently bound by coalition discipline and can negotiate on each vote individually.