Netanyahu draws calls of 'hate speech' in the newly elected Israeli parliament

 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was accused of giving a "hate-filled speech" against the Palestinian-led parties in the newly elected parliament on Tuesday.

On Tuesday, two weeks after Netanyahu's far-right bloc lost the elections following an historic voter turnout from Palestinian citizens of Israel, the parliament was sworn in in Jerusalem, with an unprecedented 19 members from the Palestinian-led Joint List alliance and Ra'am party.

Marking the ceremonial day, Netanyahu initially told the new Knesset members that Israel was facing "great threats" from Iran's nuclear programme, stating that "the only way to remove this existential threat permanently is by toppling the regime of the ayatollahs".

However, after boasting about Israeli military achievements in the occupied Palestinian territories, Syria, Lebanon and Iran, Netanyahu began lashing out at the Palestinian-led parties.

The Israeli premier said that Israel must "set aside every other consideration and form a national unity government" with his main challenger Gadi Eisenkot.

New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch

Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters

"Only such a government will be able to meet challenges of this magnitude," he said, accusing Eisenkot's broad bloc of otherwise wanting to form "a government that includes within it terror supporters, haters of Israel". 

Netanyahu clarified he was not referring to Palestinian citizens of Israel as a whole - some of whom, he said, voted for his Likud party.

'Are you prepared to be dependent on those whose purpose is the destruction of the Jewish state?'

- Benjamin Netanyahu

"I am talking about people whose ideology is hatred of Israel and the destruction of the Jewish state. People who say Hamas is just a charitable organisation," he said, referring to Ra'am and the Joint List.

"To those who are thinking of establishing a government with these people, I say: Are you prepared to be dependent on those whose purpose is the destruction of the Jewish state?"

He continued, claiming - falsely - that both Ra'am and the Joint List "agree that the Jewish state must be destroyed".

The Palestinian-led parties, who have Jewish MPs, have repeatedly called for a two-state solution in which Israel is an independent state alongside Palestine.

During the speech, Netanyahu cited past comments by Palestinian MPs, arguing that "a government that depends in any way on Ra’am or the Joint List must not be formed", and that a unity government would ensure the Jewish state would "stand for eternity".

Reactions to Netanyahu 

The speech garnered condemnation from much of Eisenkot's bloc, with former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett from the centre-right Together alliance interrupting Netanyahu during the speech, while centre-left Democrats leader Yair Golan stormed out mid-speech.

"What about a State Commission of Inquiry? Why don’t you declare Qatar an enemy state? What about your Qatari advisers?" Bennett reportedly said.

Haaretz recently reported that Netanyahu and his allies in the Israeli media had prepared the ground for an attack on the Palestinian vote, which sharply intensified following the elections, with loyalist Shin Bet chief David Zini opening investigations into election fraud and foreign interference in the last two weeks.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu called to form a Jewish-only government under his leadership, despite his bloc having only 53 seats. 

"I sat and listened to the delusional, divisive, hate-filled and shameful speech of the outgoing prime minister, in which he exploited a state occasion at the swearing-in of the 26th Knesset," Eisenkot, who earlier this week was tasked with forming a governing coalition, said on X.

She saw her husband and daughter off to Egypt. An Israeli sniper killed her on the way home

Read More »

"I became even more convinced that he is unfit to remain in office for even one minute more," the former army chief stated, adding that Netanyahu's rule was "dividing Israel and endangering its security".

Following the speech, Eisenkot cancelled coalition talks with Netanyahu's Likud party, the Israel Hayom newspaper reported. 

According to Ynet's report, Netanyahu said the word "Jewish" 20 times during his speech, while the word "unity" was said only four times, and he didn't mention any of the leaders of his opposition bloc.

On the other hand, words that relates to Palestinians, which include "Palestinians, Arabs, terrorism and Caliphate", among others, were said by Netanyahu 36 times, according to Ynet's analysis. 

Mansour Abbas, leader of the conservative Ra'am party, said on Tuesday that he was "astounded that the prime minister would exploit a state occasion to lie, to incite and to spread blood libel about the Arab parties".

"We don’t want to establish an Islamist state or an Arab state. This is where the State of Israel was established," he told Israel's Channel 12, adding that "we stand for peace and for ending the conflict with a two-state solution".

The left-wing Joint List described Netanyahu's speech as "deranged, inciting and racist".

"The bloodthirsty and criminal prime minister is in a state of complete hysteria," the party stated, adding that they were "committed to doing everything in our power" to remove Netanyahu from power and send his government "to the dustbin of history".

Canada's Anand urges all Gaza crossings be opened without naming Israel

 Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand on Wednesday called for all crossings into the Gaza Strip to be opened as heavy rains and flooding worsen conditions for Palestinian families, but without mentioning Israel.

Anand shared a post by UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher on US social media company X, urging the delivery of winter supplies into the enclave.

"As heavy rains and flooding continue in Gaza, conditions are becoming increasingly desperate for families already facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. Flooded shelters and dropping temperatures are putting lives at further risk," Anand said.

"People urgently need food, durable shelter, warm clothing, heating and essential supplies," she added.

Anand said she discussed the issue with G7 partners this week, adding: "Canada remains committed as a significant donor and an advocate for humanitarian assistance which must reach those who need it."

"We continue to call for all crossings to open, with unimpeded access for goods and supplies delivered through international organizations," she said.

"We join the Call to Action and urge all parties to remove the remaining obstacles so this assistance can reach families without further delay," Anand added.

Anand did not mention Israel in her post, which only referred to "all parties."

Israel controls access to the Gaza Strip.

Fletcher said earlier Wednesday that waiting for a new Israeli government to form is "not an acceptable excuse" for delays in getting winter supplies into Gaza.

Democratic Wave or Imperial Rebrand?

 

Democratic Wave or Imperial Rebrand?: Time Will Tell

by M. Reza Behnam | Nov 12, 2026 | 10 Comments

As a citizen and scholar, whose research, advocacy and moral framework have been dedicated to seeking justice and peace for the people of Palestine, Iran, Yemen and across West Asia, I find little cause for celebration in the recent Democratic Party midterm victories.

Political reveling makes sense if you trust the winning party offers a significant departure from the horrors of the status quo.

Applauding the Democratic Party means ignoring the ashes of Gaza, the massacre at Minab in southern Iran, and the violent legacy of 80 years of bipartisan U.S. foreign policy in the region.

When analyzing the unified bipartisan consensus that has governed U.S. policy in West Asia for decades, the apparent divide is exposed as mere illusion.  For those committed to international law, human rights and decolonization, a Democratic victory does not guarantee political reformation.  It is more likely to represent adaptation—a cosmetic shift in the stewardship of American empire.

Historical evidence demands a rejection of the conventional false binary political narrative that has framed U.S. elections:  the dichotomy between a unilateralist, militaristic Republican Party in opposition to a diplomacy oriented, human rights focused Democratic Party.  With regard to West Asia, both parties operate within a doctrine of institutional hegemony, military interventionism and colonial dominance.

While Republicans pursue aggression through overt unilateralism and unfiltered bellicose rhetoric, Democrats have executed similar policies behind a veneer of rules-based internationalism and institutional diplomacy.  The end result remains the same for the people in Gaza, Tehran, Beirut or San’a – structural violence, economic strangulation and military destruction.

The catastrophic legacy overshadowing Democratic leadership, past and present, makes it difficult for me to foresee, in the party’s electoral success, any departure from a foreign policy dictated by entrenched institutional systems.

The Biden-Harris administration did not simply miscalculate diplomacy; it actively embraced and underwrote what international legal bodies, human rights organizations and scholars worldwide have characterized as genocide in Gaza.

Most Democrats in Congress fast-tracked the shipment of munitions to Israel to carry out its devastating war on Gaza, rather than opposing it.

It is important to remember that it was Democratic leaders and representatives who stayed silent when:

• President Joe Biden signed off on billions of dollars in unconditional military aid, transferring heavy weapons, artillery shells and precision-guided bombs to the Israeli regime that killed countless Palestinians and decimated civilian infrastructure across the Gaza Strip.
• Democratic leaders repeatedly deployed the veto at the UN Security Council, neutralizing international legal mechanisms designed to enforce ceasefires and hold war criminals accountable.
• The administration and party establishment sought to vilify and suppress student activists, scholars and dissenting citizens who demanded an end to American complicity in the destruction of Palestinian life.

A party that has, without conditions, armed, funded and morally shielded and enabled conduct that violates the baseline of human dignity cannot legitimately claim the mantle of progressivism, peace and democracy.

This critique is not limited to Palestine; it encompasses the wider region, particularly concerning U.S. policy toward Iran.  The conventional narrative that the Democrats represent a reasoned diplomatic alternative to Republican hawkish saber-rattling is contradicted by historical record:

• Sanctions as collective punishment: Democratic administrations have consistently maintained and expanded comprehensive economic sanction regimes against Iran. These policies have devastated the Iranian middle class, restricted access to life-saving medicines and crippled civic infrastructure.
• Entrenched militarism: Rather than dismantling the structure of confrontation, Democratic leadership has fortified heavily armed military bases surrounding Iran, reinforcing a regional security framework that has prioritized the sale of weapons over real security cooperation.
• Complicity in regional escalation: The Democrats’ policy of granting unchecked latitude to Israel and its regional Arab allies, ultimately laid the groundwork for Tel Aviv’s unprovoked war on Iran and escalating instability throughout the area.

The civic obligation of scholarship, rooted in peace and justice, is to accurately identify oppressive systems and structures, independent of the ruling political party.

 True political renewal cannot be found in an election that merely offers a reshuffling of the empire’s stewards.  Simply changing the political party in power is meaningless without confronting and dismantling the systemic framework and forces behind U.S. foreign policy, which directly exacerbate domestic inequality. Justice cannot be built on electoral wins that leave the destructive apparatus of the military-industrial-security framework undisturbed.

Blue Wave victors campaigned on a promise to break from the past; to fashion a bold new era of accountability, structural reform and progressive ideals.  Yet, beyond the speeches and good intentions, they must contend with an embedded military, security and economic establishment built specifically to resist change, neutralize political challenges and assimilate reformists into its power structure.

The new “wave” of Democrats have received a mandate from the voters to drown out the party’s old guard managers of empire and to move away from its traditional  foreign policy of global hegemony, endless wars and support for dictatorial regimes.  The electorate has instead authorized them to honor international laws and treaties, while developing a new diplomatic path in West Asia.

When the Democratic Party ends its complicity with Israel in the brutal colonization and subjugation of Palestinians, terminates its 48-year aggressive  stance toward Iran and adopts a policy that respects the sovereignty and humanity of all people across West Asia, I will rejoice. Until then, I continue to worry that the “blue wave” will simply fade into the hidebound bloody “red” one.

As the euphoric dust settles over the midterms, a central question remains.  Are we witnessing a true victory for democratic renewal or simply the seamless rebranding of an empire under new management?  Time will tell.

© 2026, M. Reza Behnam, Ph.D.

 

Israeli Bombing of Gaza Hospital Kills Six, Including Prominent Surgeon and 13-Year-Old Boy

Rizk Abu Shaaira, the surgeon who was killed, was recently featured in the film 'American Doctor'

by Dave DeCamp | November 12, 2026 at 1:42 pm ET | Gaza, Israel

Israel bombed the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, early Thursday morning, killing at least six people, including a prominent surgeon and a 13-year-old boy, a clear war crime under the Geneva Convention.

The Israeli strike hit the hospital’s surgery ward, with witnesses describing two missiles crashing into the building and knocking the surgery department out of operation. At least 20 people were also wounded in the attack. “All of a ​sudden, the world turned upside down. It went dark all at once,” Ayman Abu Obeid, a doctor who was injured in the attack, told Reuters.

The surgeon who was killed, Rizk Abu Shaaira, was recently featured in the film “American Doctor,” which followed three US doctors as they volunteered in Gaza and worked alongside Palestinian medical professionals.

Palestinians inspect damage inside a building at Nasser Hospital following an Israeli airstrike in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, November 12, 2026. REUTERS/Ramadan Abed

“My colleague and friend Dr. Rizk Abu Shaaira was killed yesterday at work when Israel, backed by the US as always, bombed the surgical recovery room at Nasser Medical Complex,” Dr. Feroze Sidhwa, an American trauma surgeon who was in the film, wrote on X.

Sidhwa said that Shaaira “was one of those surgeons we describe as super enthusiastic” who “would jump at the opportunity to change a dressing, clean a wound, or pull a drain.”

“Dr. Rizk’s shocking murder is yet another reminder of why we must get control of our country. Our government has no right to force us to subsidize the mass murder of doctors and children, not in Palestine and not anywhere,” Sidhwa added.

The Israeli military claimed the attack targeted Muhammad Abu Ismail, and described him as “the commander of Hamas’ Khan Younis Brigade.” The IDF accused Hamas militants of turning the hospital into a “headquarters,” allegations that Hamas strongly denied in a statement where it called the attack a “full-fledged war crime and terrorist behavior.”

Ismail’s name was also not on the list of the six people who were killed, according to a list of the victims circulating among Gaza medical workers that was reported by Drop Site News. The 13-year-old boy who was killed was identified as Jihad Naeem Abu Tilekh, who had undergone surgery days earlier.

Even if Israel’s claims about Hamas operating at the hospital are true, Article 19 of the Fourth Geneva Convention outlines strict limits under which a hospital loses its civilian protection status.

“The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy. Protection may, however, cease only after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded,” Article 19 states.

The hospital and witnesses strongly deny Israel’s claim that a warning was given before the strike, and Abu Obeid and other medical staff were sleeping when the missiles hit the hospital. Drop Site also noted that there’s been no “ongoing fighting” since, as Hamas hasn’t fired a single rocket since the signing of the ceasefire deal, despite Israel’s constant violations of the agreement, which have killed more than 1,600 Palestinians.

“Under the Geneva Conventions, a hospital loses protection only if used for ‘acts harmful to the enemy.’ Even then, the expected harm to patients and staff cannot be excessive compared to the military gain, and a warning does nothing to meet that test when intensive care patients cannot be moved. Hamas has fired no rockets since agreeing to a ceasefire. There is no ongoing fighting,” Drop Site wrote on X.

President Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace,” which is meant to oversee the ceasefire deal, released a statement on the strike that backed the Israeli narrative and condemned Hamas.

Israeli forces appear to have used US-made bombs in the attack. CNN reported that footage from inside Nasser Hospital showed two bombs, including one that failed to explode. A label on the unexploded munition identified it as a US-made GBU-39/B, a 250-pound bomb that the US has supplied to Israel.

The US continues to back Israel’s daily attacks despite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejecting a US-backed proposal that would involve Hamas giving up its weapons. Israeli attacks pounded other parts of Gaza on Thursday, killing four more Palestinians, bringing the day’s death toll to at least 10.

Twelve Senators Call for US-Israel Military Integration To Be Removed from NDAA

The letter, led by Sen. Chris Van Hollen, also calls for the removal of an amendment that would mandate an increase in US intelligence sharing to Israel

by Dave DeCamp | November 11, 2026 at 8:21 pm ET

A group of 12 senators has written to congressional leadership urging the removal of provisions from the House and Senate versions of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would mandate increased US-Israeli military and intelligence cooperation.

The idea of the amendments is to further integrate the US and Israeli militaries and make the special relationship harder to unwind, a reaction to the increasing criticism of Israel among Americans.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing for the integration, which he has referred to as “my plan,” and says it will come with a phase-out of US financial military aid to Israel over time, but defense analysts have warned the aid will just be buried in the Pentagon budget and less visible to the public.

US Marines converse with Israeli soldiers during exercises at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, April 27, 2026 (US Marine Corps photo)

While both the House and the Senate have included the integration plan in their draft NDAAs, the two chambers have yet to go to conference to negotiate the final bill, where the amendments could potentially be stripped out.

The letter, led by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and signed by nine other Democrats and one Independent (Sen. Bernie Sanders), urges congressional leaders to “exclude three provisions from the final bill that would further entrench concerning aspects of the US-Israel defense and intelligence relationship at a time when the Israeli government’s actions are increasingly undermining US interests and values.”

The senators said that the “provisions would constrain the Administration’s ability to independently determine how best to protect US national security and would lock in long-term commitments despite our serious concerns with the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza, the West Bank, and other parts of the region.”

The letter calls for the removal of Section 219 from the House bill and Section 1217 from the Senate one, which both “mandate the creation of a ‘United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative’ to expand and accelerate the US-Israel defense relationship, including technology sharing, co-production of weapons systems, and bilateral research and development.”

They said that the provisions would “threaten US national security interests by handing Israel leverage over American weapons systems and military technology.”

The letter also calls for the removal of Section 618 of the Senate’s Intelligence Authorization Act, which would mandate increased intelligence sharing with Israel. “The provision would tie the President’s hands from limiting intelligence sharing with Israel, even when doing so may be necessary to protect US national security. That would be irresponsible and especially troubling given public reports that the Defense Intelligence Agency recently raised the counterintelligence threat from Israel to its highest level,” the letter reads.

UK mosque rebukes comission’s ‘warning’ following Palestine comments

 The Lewisham Islamic Centre (LIC) in London has rejected a warning issued by the UK’s independent Charity Commission, which reprimanded the mosque for comments on Palestinian suffering made by an imam during October 2023 sermons.

“The matters raised by the Commission represent a troubling attempt to scrutinise, restrict and penalise legitimate religious worship” and “the expression of solidarity with the Palestinian people,” the mosque said in an official statement issued Wednesday.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 items

• list 1 of 3UK to double wait for permanent residency, with exemptions for care workers
• list 2 of 3UK Supreme Court hears appeal against Palestine Action’s proscription
• list 3 of 3UK jailing of Indian sailor over Russia sanctions sets off ‘perfect storm’

end of list

The statement comes after the charity watchdog accused the religious centre of including “content that was inflammatory, divisive and not in the charity’s best interests” during two separate sermons, as they issued an official warning urging the centre to “improve its handling of speakers and events hosted at the charity’s premises” on October 20.

The commission warned that if the mosque fails to “remedy the misconduct”, it may be subjected to further action.

1:30

• Now Playing

  01:30

  

  Palestine activists shut down Israeli arms factory as UK Supreme Court considers ban

• Next

  00:43

  

  Suspect turns gun on himself after deadly shooting in Washington DC

• 01:42

  

  Al Jazeera reports from Gaza hospital attacked by Israel

• 01:22

  

  Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang steps down, more affair details revealed

• 03:20

  

  Jerusalem Daily: Gaza’s Nasser Hospital hit by Israeli air strike

‘Unnecessarily burdensome’

The mosque also accused the commission of imposing disproportionate expectations on Muslim charities after the warning, describing them as “unnecessarily burdensome”. The religious centre explained that a sermon, or khutbah, is an integral part of Islamic worship and often speaks to the issues affecting the wellbeing of congregations and their communities. The LIC worried that the warning suggested the commission was “entitled to dictate which subjects Imams may address in their khutbahs”.

LIC added that they are currently seeking legal advice as to the best way to move forward following the warning.

Advertisement

CAGE International, a London-based human rights organisation, supported the mosque, and claimed the Charity Commission showed lenience when it came to pro-Israel charities.

“The Commission’s position treats the word ‘Zionist’ as inflammatory in itself,” CAGE said on Thursday. “This merges opposition to a political ideology with hatred of a people, and places Muslim religious expression under suspicion by default.”

“The Commission has told a mosque that naming who is responsible for Palestinian suffering falls outside acceptable religious practice,” a spokesperson for CAGE said. “This is the same regulator asking for the power to remove trustees for their views,” they added, referring to a recent government consultation to expand the Charity Commission’s powers.

0:47

Protester’s ‘I support genocide’ sign appears to face no police action