US-‘Israel’ alliance faces growing rupture after midterms
Al Mayadeen | November 5, 2026
The 2026 US midterm elections have exposed a deepening political crisis in Washington’s longstanding relationship with “Israel”, as Democratic victories, declining public support, and statements from senior Republican officials raise questions about the future of American military assistance and diplomatic backing, Bloomberg reports.
Michigan elected Abdul el-Sayed as the country’s first Muslim senator on Tuesday. His campaign included a pledge to end US military aid to the Israeli occupation and characterized its war on Gaza as genocide. His victory came despite the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) reportedly spending $30 million against him.
In Georgia, Senator Jon Ossoff secured reelection, reinforcing the growing presence of Democrats critical of American weapons transfers to “Israel”. Ossoff was among the first Senate Democrats to oppose offensive weapons sales in 2024, a position that has since gained support across much of his party’s caucus.
The electoral developments reflect a broader transformation in American political attitudes toward the occupation and the military campaign in Gaza.
According to a March NBC News poll cited in the original report, only 13% of Democrats held a positive view of “Israel”. The figure was comparable to the share among young American voters overall, regardless of political affiliation.
Minority of GOP support Israeli regime
The trend also extends into Republican ranks. A Pew Research Center survey published in October found that only slightly more than a quarter of young Republicans supported the Israeli government.
For decades, successive US administrations maintained bipartisan backing for the Israeli occupation, providing military financing, advanced weapons, and diplomatic protection. The changing political landscape now threatens the assumption that this support will remain unaffected by electoral competition.
Bloomberg reports that Michael Allen, managing director and partner at Beacon Global Strategies, said the developments had put “Israel” in a precarious position.
“For the foreseeable future I think they’re in a lot of trouble,” he said, pointing to the political developments following the Israeli elections.
AIPAC influence faces mounting electoral resistance
El-Sayed’s election carries significance beyond his victory in Michigan. It challenges the influence of pro-“Israel” lobbying organizations that have traditionally sought to shape congressional positions and electoral outcomes.
The reported $30 million campaign against him illustrates the financial resources deployed against candidates advocating restrictions on military assistance. His victory, however, demonstrates that opposition to unconditional support for “Israel” is gaining electoral ground despite substantial lobbying pressure.
The growing divide within the Democratic Party is particularly consequential as Democrats prepare to assume commanding majorities in both chambers of Congress.
Although legislative efforts to restrict arms transfers remain unlikely to become law under the current administration, a larger bloc of lawmakers opposing military assistance could increase scrutiny of weapons sales, military financing, and Washington’s diplomatic protection of “Israel”.
The shift also presents a longer-term challenge. Younger voters are increasingly approaching the issue differently from previous generations, potentially reshaping the foreign policy positions of both major parties.
Trump and Vance signal Republican reassessment
The political pressure has also reached the Republican leadership with US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly described himself as the most pro-“Israel” president in US history, announcing on Tuesday that Washington would end its annual $3.8 billion in military assistance to “Israel”.
Speaking to Fox News, Trump said the arrangement would end this year, arguing that “Israel” had become sufficiently successful to operate without direct American military financing.
He also acknowledged the domestic political implications, describing the issue as “almost too easy a target.”
US Vice President JD Vance reinforced the significance of the announcement in a social media post published after the Republican electoral losses. He identified the need to “change our relationship to Israel” as central to the party’s efforts to regain control of Congress and the White House in 2028.
Vance is widely expected to seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2028, making his intervention particularly significant.
The remarks suggest that maintaining unconditional support for “Israel” is increasingly being viewed as an electoral liability, even within Republican political circles.
Nomi Bar-Yaacov, associate fellow at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, described the election results as a rejection of Netanyahu’s government.
“It is a clear vote of no confidence in the outgoing Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,” she said, Bloomberg reports. “This marks a huge, huge shift in the US-Israel relationship.”
Netanyahu faces political fallout as aid agreement comes under scrutiny
The developments in Washington coincide with Netanyahu’s struggle to retain power following the inconclusive October 27 elections in “Israel”.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog is expected to decide whether Netanyahu or his principal challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, will receive the first opportunity to form a government.
Opposition figures have already used the American election results to challenge Netanyahu’s political position.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid argued that the results eliminated the possibility of a unity government led by Netanyahu. Liberal opposition leader Yair Golan said they demonstrated “just how toxic Netanyahu is among both Democrats and Republicans.”
Avishay Ben Sasson-Gordis, head of US-“Israel” research at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, described the situation as a major political emergency.
“Politically, this is a five-alarm fire,” he told Bloomberg.
He argued that Trump’s announcement demonstrated how politically damaging “Israel” had become, potentially sending negative signals to its regional rivals.
‘We made a deal that we’re stopping’
The financial implications remain uncertain. Earlier this year, Netanyahu reportedly expressed interest in gradually reducing dependence on US military assistance over the following decade. In June, American and Israeli officials announced negotiations over a new agreement expected to take effect in 2028, focusing on joint investment in research, development, and weapons production.
Trump told Fox News, “Netanyahu and I have made a deal … We made a deal months ago that we’re stopping — and they’re fine with it. They’ve become a very successful country. They don’t need it. And we won’t be paying anymore.”
However, the announcement appears to have caught Israeli government officials off guard.
Two Finance Ministry officials told Bloomberg that they and their counterparts in the Ministry of War were surprised by the reported agreement. Two Foreign Ministry officials separately said they had not been informed of any changes to the existing memorandum of understanding. All four requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
The apparent discrepancy raises questions about the agreement’s status and whether Washington is preparing to alter the financial foundations of its relationship with “Israel”.
Midterm loss gives Congress power to rein in US war on Iran
Al Mayadeen| November 5, 2026
Tuesday’s midterm elections have left US President Donald Trump facing a Congress with the constitutional means to restrain the US war on Iran, while strengthening Tehran’s hand in negotiations over its memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Washington.
Retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski and Mohammad Marandi, professor of English literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran, reached that assessment on Al Mayadeen’s The Grand Standoff on Wednesday.
They tied the Republican losses to Trump’s abandoned promises to end wars and prosecute the “Epstein class,” the economic toll of the war on Iran, and a growing American backlash against Israeli influence in Washington.
Marandi called the result “a major turning point,” though he stressed that the war is far from over.
Congress holds the power to act
The Congress to be seated in January 2027 “was elected to stop the Iran war,” Kwiatkowski argued, and it has several levers to do so. House appropriators can freeze funds not yet disbursed, she explained, while the Senate can pass binding resolutions and refuse a declaration of war, which the Constitution requires.
She noted that Trump has already exceeded the 60-day limit on military action and dismissed his move of halting at day 58 and restarting the clock as “a joke.” A non-binding Senate resolution criticizing the war passed this summer by only a vote or two, she recalled, but a Senate majority now opposed to it could bar him from acting and censure him.
Kwiatkowski cautioned that change will not come overnight, since AIPAC has lobbied lawmakers of both parties for decades. She pointed out that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer still avoids admitting the war was fought for “Israel,” even though Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and War Secretary Pete Hegseth have acknowledged that Netanyahu wanted it.
Marandi stressed that the vote also raises the political cost of escalation. A renewed attack would be seen as illegitimate because Americans voted against the war, he predicted, adding that “the price would be much heavier for him and his allies” than before the election.
‘Israel,’ AIPAC take the hit
Both guests named “Israel” as the election’s biggest loser.
Marandi pointed out that Vice President JD Vance himself conceded “Israel” was a key factor in the Republican defeat, since all four reasons Vance cited link directly or indirectly to it.
Kwiatkowski judged Vance’s reading correct but suggested he is trying to distance himself from a sinking Trump, and doubted he would act on it after helping Trump attack anti-war conservatives.
Winning Candidates refused AIPAC money and used the word genocide, Kwiatkowski observed, singling out incoming senators Talarico of Texas and El-Sayed of Michigan, who both voiced moral revulsion at US taxpayer money funding a genocide in Gaza. “That is a slap in Netanyahu’s face,” she said, adding that candidates who defy AIPAC and still win will encourage others to follow.
Marandi cited polls showing young Jewish Americans oppose genocide, apartheid and ethnic cleansing, and credited Americans with waking up “despite being the most propagandized people in the world.” He warned against naivety about the Democratic leadership, though, noting that Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries backed Biden’s policy on Gaza.
A president unlikely to change course
Kwiatkowski rejected Trump’s claim that election results would have been different had he been on the ballot, describing the vote as a referendum on his executive-centered rule.
She also doubted he would adjust, arguing that “the Trump who is 80 years old is irrational” and that only Congress and sustained public pressure can constrain him.
In her view, he is more likely to pick a fight with a Democratic Congress over Ukraine, where Democrats want to keep funding Kiev and maintain tariffs on Russia.
Iran prepares for war
Marandi warned that a US attack could come at any moment. Iranian forces are on full alert, three US aircraft carriers are in place, and “the nights will be very dark” as the weekend approaches, he said.
He added that the Axis of Resistance is active on all fronts, from Lebanon to Sanaa and from Iraq to Tehran, and extended congratulations to Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Palestine for helping shift opinion in the United States.
Iran, he continued, will keep tightening the noose in the Strait of Hormuz and demand full US compliance with the MOU. Tehran would shorten the implementation timeline and is ready to “sugarcoat the MOU,” but it will not withdraw its seven demands or allow the substance to change.
He contended that Iran is now in a much stronger position and Trump a much weaker one, noting that Jimmy Carter, whose comparison Trump has long feared, “looks far more successful” in hindsight.
Carter’s shadow over Trump
The discussion turned to the anniversary of the 1979 seizure of the US embassy in Tehran, which Marandi argued Americans are taught to see as the origin of the US’ conflict with Iran, as though the takeover were an irrational act with no cause. Iranians view it differently, he explained, because it followed decades of US interference.
Washington overthrew Iran’s government in 1953, installed the Shah and helped build the SAVAK secret police. During the revolution, the army killed protesters across the country, including on Black Friday in Tehran, and Carter phoned the Shah the next day to reaffirm his support.
After the revolution, Marandi continued, the embassy supported separatist groups and kept contact with officers who might carry out a coup. The decision to admit the Shah to the United States then revived fears of a repeat of 1953, and that was what pushed Iranians to take the embassy.
He hoped that Americans, now more politically aware because of the war, would come to understand that history better.
Kwiatkowski saw the same continuity in Washington’s present-day aims, arguing that US goals toward Iran have barely changed since Carter and still amount to making Iran “kneel before the hegemon.”
She called it a long war, but affirmed that “Iran is winning it.”
Midterms Were ‘Vote of No Confidence’ in GOP, But Iran Has No Illusions About Democrats – Marandi
Sputnik – 05.11.2026
Tuesday’s crushing midterm defeat for Republicans was a “good sign” showing “that the American people are pushing the elites” and “putting pressure on them,” but the Democrats’ victory won’t bring positive changes to US foreign policy, Tehran University professor and prolific political commentator Mohammad Marandi has told Sputnik.
“The Democratic Party is not a party of peace,” Marandi emphasized, pointing out that Democrats were in charge when Israel unleashed its bloody campaign in Gaza in 2023, and initiated or greenlit the bombings, dirty wars and proxy conflicts in Libya, Syria and Yemen, as well as the crisis in Ukraine.
As far as Iran is concerned, the change of power in Congress “doesn’t mean the war is over.” The US “may attack Iran at any time. But it does mean that the regime in Washington, the political establishment in Washington, recognizes that the American people are sick and tired of war,” Marandi said.
“The working assumption is that the United States will carry out aggression,” Marandi emphasized.
“The [pro-Israel lobby] will not give up, and they are the ones who are still in charge,” Marandi said. He warned, however, that any new war will be “much more costly” for the US and Israel, both politically and militarily.
“Any attack on Iran will be met with a decisive response, and that will lead to a global economic calamity.”
Israel will inevitably also work to try to rope the US into a new conflict, because they can’t fight alone, the observer noted.
Israel “needs, for example, the refueling planes of the United States. That would mean US involvement…And that, of course, would mean the involvement of the Arab regimes in the region…because the United States uses their bases, airspace and jet fuel,” Marandi said.
“Iran is both prepared for a very decisive battle in the coming days or weeks, and they’re prepared for a very long-term conflict as well,” with the government putting a wartime economy in place, Marandi said.
The military has received “a very large budget,” with the country traditionally having “the smallest military budget in the region” for decades.
The military is building “new underground cities,” expanding existing missile city and command and control infrastructure, developing new missiles, drones, and producing so much equipment they’re running out of places to store them, Marandi said.
The Islamic Republic is ready to fight through the remainder of the current US administration’s term, if necessary, and will not relent, Marandi stressed. The US will have to come to the negotiating table in the end.
Did Israel lose the midterms?
Trump is paying a heavy price for joining Benjamin Netanyahu’s war on Iran
RT | November 4, 2026
The view from Washington is clear: President Donald Trump’s decision to wage war on Iran cost the Republican Party the midterm elections. RT looks at how Benjamin Netanyahu’s war became Trump’s problem and whether Israel will bear any costs.
The Republican Party suffered an unequivocal wipeout in Tuesday’s midterm elections, handing Democrats their largest House majority since Bill Clinton entered the White House in 1993, along with a majority of at least ten seats in the Senate. Democrats flipped Senate seats in Texas, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, and Maine, while Trump-backed gubernatorial candidates Vivek Ramaswamy and Greg Abbott lost in Ohio and Texas respectively – states Trump won comfortably in 2024.
All of this is a dramatic about-turn from 2024, when Trump and the GOP won a decisive mandate after promising to lower costs and keep the US out of foreign wars.
Did Israel cost Trump the elections?
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the White House five times between Trump’s inauguration and the start of ‘Operation Epic Fury’ this February. The Israeli leader consulted Trump’s closest neoconservative allies, among them the late Senator Lindsey Graham, for advice on how to persuade Trump into war with Iran, and when the war began, an army of pro-Israel podcasters and influencers reassured Trump’s base that it would be easily won and would have no impact on the midterms.
“I think in the midterms this will be kind of a mild footnote,” conservative journalist Will Chamberlain predicted in April, two months into the war. “Whatever happens in the midterms, it doesn’t appear that Iran’s going to drive anything one way or another,” pro-Israel radio host Mark Levin told podcast host Ben Shapiro in September.
Shapiro, who like Levin has spent years lobbying for war with Iran, claimed that Trump’s unpopularity in the run-up to the elections was “not because of this stuff.”
Trump entered the war with no clear victory conditions or exit plan and, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, at the direct behest of Israel. Although the war is the least popular American military adventure since Vietnam, Pew Research ranked foreign policy the sixth-most important issue among midterm voters, with the economy in first place. Trump and the GOP could likely have survived an unpopular war had the closure of the Strait of Hormuz not driven gasoline prices to record highs, undermining his campaign trail promises to reverse the sky-high costs of the Biden years.
What’s the view on the right?
To many in Trump’s original MAGA base, the war was a catastrophic unforced error that directly cost the Republicans the elections. “Trump launched an unpopular and pointless war. Gas prices are too high. People can’t afford groceries. Trump abandoned the American First message. This is why Republicans are getting crushed. It’s very simple,” podcast host Matt Walsh wrote on X.
“Tonight is a massacre because of Iran,” right-wing influencer Scott Greer posted, adding that “denying that is pure cope.”
“President Trump, and it’s hard to even understand why, continues to do whatever Netanyahu tells him to do,” former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene told RT. “We will continue to see this war go on.”
The pro-Israel right has shirked responsibility for the loss. “The vast majority of us are utterly unaffected by that war,” Levin said on election night. “If we lose… it’s not because of the Iran war.” Neoconservative influencer Joel Berry blamed the loss not on Trump’s war or high gas prices, but on “a sophisticated foreign demoralization campaign” that drew attention to these issues, and on Republicans going “socialist on economics and soft on abortion.”
In Tehran, the prognosis is [dis]similar. “I think the war of aggression against Iran played the key role in Trump’s defeat,” University of Tehran professor Mohammad Marandi told RT. “The Iranian resistance and resilience and steadfastness against Trump and Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby… it has turned the tide against Trump.”
“While there is a uniparty of sorts [in Washington],” Marandi continued, “ordinary people felt that this is the only way that they could make their views known. It was a bad defeat for Trump and for Zionism.”
Did Israel lose its bet?
In pressuring Trump into attacking Iran, Netanyahu succeeded where he had failed with George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Trump, the Israeli prime minister remarked last year, “is the greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House. No American president has ever done more for Israel. And it’s not even close.”
Pro-Israel donors spent around $123 million on Trump’s 2024 campaign, with Israeli-American megadonor Miriam Adelson coughing up the lion’s share at $106 million, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
Since then, Trump has purged anti-Israel voices – including Greene, Rep. Thomas Massie, former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent, and a host of formerly loyal media allies including Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones – from his MAGA movement, and given Netanyahu the war he wanted for decades, but at a cost to West Jerusalem.
American sympathy for Israel vis-a-vis the Palestinians is at an all-time low, more than half of all Americans want military aid to Israel cut off or decreased, and 71% of Americans told Ipsos in April that they want nothing to do with Israel’s various Middle Eastern conflicts. Tens of millions of dollars in donations from the US’ powerful Israel lobby failed to prevent candidates such as Senators-elect Abdul el-Sayed in Michigan and Representatives-elect Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York, Adam Hamawy in New Jersey, and Donavan McKinney in Michigan from winning on an explicitly anti-Israel message.
A Democrat-dominated Congress may be slightly less compliant to Netanyahu’s demands, but regardless of whether the GOP won or lost on Tuesday, the Israeli leader is currently fighting to form a coalition after losing his majority in last week’s parliamentary elections, and may not be in power in January.
Moreover, the Israel lobby remains a potent force in American politics, and its influence transcends party lines. Hakeem Jeffries, who will assume speakership in January, is among the 354 of 433 sitting members of the House who have received funding from AIPAC, while el-Sayed will be the only Senator not to have taken money from AIPAC or another pro-Israel group such as J Street or the Republican Jewish Coalition.
AIPAC spent $120 million on this year’s midterms, and 245 of 267 candidates – 92% – backed by the group won their races on Tuesday, according to data from ‘Who Funds my Rep?’
“It doesn’t matter whether it’s the Democratic Party or the Republican Party,” Marandi told RT. “Both parties are utterly corrupt and bound to the ‘Epstein Class’, as I would call it. The issue isn’t so much who replaces whom, but that the mood among ordinary Americans has shifted. If the elites don’t take this into account, they will get into trouble.”
Did Iran win the elections?
Whether or not Iran benefits from the Republican loss depends largely on what Trump does next. The midterms may have rendered Trump a lame duck and dealt the GOP a generational defeat, but the president still retains the power to wage war, and that’s exactly what some of his most vocal ‘Israel-first’ allies want him to do.
There is “nothing to lose now,” pro-Israel influencer Laura Loomer wrote on X. “Time for President Trump to deal with Iran once and for all. Just do it.”
“Trump still has time to topple the [Iranian] regime and be remembered as one of the greatest US presidents,” Israeli analyst Dr. Eli David posted.
Trump has strongly suggested that he could restart the war after the midterms, telling supporters at a rally last week that “you’ll see Iran in a couple of weeks.” Speaking to Fox News on Wednesday, the president said that “in a short period of time, we have to do something large” against Iran, and that this would likely involve a “heavy hit.”
Should Trump go down this route, he is on a clear countdown timer. The new, Democrat-controlled Congress will be sworn in on January 3. Although Democrats have voted on several resolutions this year aimed at preventing Trump from waging war against Iran, these have all been destined to fail with Republicans in charge of both houses of Congress. Now, voters expect even their AIPAC-funded Senators and Representatives to follow through and rein in Trump’s war powers.
“If Trump chooses to attack Iran now,” Marandi told RT, “Democrats and some Republicans will be under some pressure to stand up to Trump, whether their funders like it or not.”
Tehran is not holding out hope for a course correction in Washington, but Tuesday’s election taught both parties a lesson that will reverberate for years to come: picking a fight with Iran is economically unviable, domestically unpopular, and political suicide for whoever is in the White House.
The bottom line
Trump and the GOP paid the ultimate price for agreeing to fight Benjamin Netanyahu’s war, with only the most die-hard Israel-firsters in the Republican camp suggesting that anything else was to blame for the shellacking the party received on Tuesday.
For Israel, the results are less clear. Netanyahu, or whoever succeeds him, may never get another American president as amenable as Trump. However, the Israelis still have a powerful lobby in Washington that will get to work on the new Congress, just as it has done for decades, to make extricating the US from the Iran war as difficult as possible.
How Iran defeated Trump’s Israel First GOP
By Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone | November 4, 2026
Trump launched a failed war on Iran for Israel last February, as his NSC director and Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted. Now, the war has come home.
Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz became a vice grip around the neck of Trump and the GOP, especially in the heartland, where diesel prices are 70% higher than a year ago, and farmers have been forced to leave crops in the ground. 74% of Americans told pollsters the failed Iran war was a crucial or major factor in their vote tonight, and over 60% said they were voting against the Republicans because of it.
Democrats won senate races in Kansas and Nebraska, agro producer states where Republicans always roll to victory like a big wheel through a corn field. They also flipped a seat in Iowa, which Trump won by 12 points in 2024, giving them control of the senate.
A Democrat has taken the seat of Lindsey Graham, the late neocon who advised Netanyahu on how to manipulate Trump into the war, resoundingly defeating his sister in South Carolina. In this deep red Southern bastion, a Democrat has not won a senate race since the days of Fritz Hollings, a now-extinct brand of conservative populist who opposed the Gulf war and railed against the neocons.
Trump’s promise of $15 billion in aid to farmers getting hammered by surging diesel costs failed to stop the bleeding. And it’s now another cost of the war.
The GOP strategy of hanging Hasan Piker and his pro-Palestine politics like an albatross around the neck of Democrats was also doomed from the start, as most swing state voters had never heard of the podcaster. Worse, the ploy reminded them how fanatically Israel-centric the Republicans had become under Trump. The Democrats had much more success weaponizing Jeffrey Epstein as a symbol of Trump’s corruption whose ghost subtly invoked malign Israeli influence over the US government.
Hours before polls closed, Trump issued a desperate pledge to end $4 billion in annual aid to Israel. He seemed determined to repeat the con he pulled off in Dearborn, MI at the end of 2024, where he promised to end the Gaza genocide that Biden and Harris backed. Later that night, after the Democrats took the Senate, Trump gave up any pretense of independence and declared: “If people ever got tired of me in the US, I’ll move to Israel and become prime minister.”
Where the “special relationship” with Israel was once a matter of bipartisan unity among party elites, it’s become a polarizing wedge issue and a poison pill for any president. Trump was expected to launch a third assault on Iran immediately after the midterms, but his inner circle is now positioned in a circular firing line, with the neocons who served as Netanyahu’s proxies – Mark Levine, Mark Dubowitz, Ben Shapiro et al – blaming everyone but themselves for the Blue Wave, while pleading to remain in Trump’s good graces.
Tomorrow, Zionist forces will pull back and retrench. Schumer, Jeffries and presidential prospects like Josh Shapiro will become their next line of defense, and possibly their last reliable one in a party whose base is now passionate about ending America’s attachment to Israel.
US Elections Offer Choice Between ‘Bad and Worse’ as Both Parties Serve War Lobby – ex-UN Expert
Sputnik – 04.11.2026
Both parties are “beholden to the military-industrial complex and to the AIPAC lobby,” and “the problem with the American two-party system is that most of the time it is a choice between bad and worse,” Alfred de Zayas, a retired independent UN expert and prolific commentator, told Sputnik, commenting on the results of Tuesday’s midterms.
“Both Republican and Democratic candidates advocate war over diplomacy, support Wall Street over Main Street, and promote Israel over Palestine. Very few address the needs of the American people, the key issues of education, public health, taxation, infrastructure and job-creation,” the observer stressed.
While de Zayas has little hope that the new Democrat-controlled Senate, led by Senator Chuck Schumer, will bring positive changes, he nevertheless welcomes Republicans’ loss of Congress. He believes the result will limit Trump’s ability to pursue his agenda following his “disappointing” failure to resolve the Ukraine crisis, which he traces to Democratic policies, and the decision to launch a new war against Iran.
De Zayas fears a range of potential “Apocalyptic scenarios” for Iran moving forward, including the potential use of nuclear weapons and the conflict’s escalation into a global crisis, unless the US and Israel agree to a diplomatic climbdown. “In such desperate situations, either one takes the offensive and unleashes World War III, or one accepts reality, cuts one’s losses and resigns.”
While the UN has “been ineffective” on Iran, Gaza and other crises, it’s nevertheless needed now “more than ever” to prevent them from spiraling.
“We need an international peace conference,” de Zayas urges. “This is the moment for the Global Majority, for BRICS, the SCO, the OIC, the Non-Aligned Movement to appeal to all parties to exercise restraint.”
Ghalibaf warns US government not to betray voters who rejected war
Al Mayadeen| November 4, 2026
Americans rejected war at the ballot box, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said on Wednesday, warning Washington that any attempt to defy that verdict would meet a forceful Iranian response.
Writing on X after Democrats won the Senate in Tuesday’s midterm elections, Ghalibaf said voters moved by “conscience or the cost of living” had said “NO TO WAR,” a message he stressed Iran endorses. Should the US government betray its own public’s will to serve “international paymasters and blackmailers,” he cautioned, it would discover that Iran’s refusal “comes with a Nightmare.”
Trump, for his part, acknowledged that the war on Iran had weighed on Republicans. “Iran was a piece of it,” he told The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday night when asked whether the war had shaped the outcome.
He nonetheless stood by his decision to launch the aggression. “I did the right thing. I would have done it again,” he said. He argued that soaring fuel prices, a consequence of the war, had hurt his party more than the war itself and rejected the idea that the losses were a verdict on his presidency. “The biggest issue is that I wasn’t on the ballot,” he insisted.
Democrats take Congress
The Associated Press called the Senate for Democrats late Tuesday. They gained seven seats, many in states Trump carried comfortably in 2024.
James Talarico defeated Trump-backed Ken Paxton in Texas, giving the party its first Senate win there since 1988, and Adam Hamilton became the first Democrat elected to the Senate from Kansas since 1932. Democrats also flipped seats in North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Iowa and Maine, where Troy Jackson unseated Susan Collins.
Democrats later secured the House as well. AP’s latest count puts them at 220 seats to Republicans’ 128, past the 218 needed for a majority, with 25 seats gained so far.
Counting continues in several races.
War, prices drove the vote
According to the NBC News Exit Poll, about 74% of voters described the US war on Iran as a crucial or major factor in their congressional vote.
In the same poll, 79% said inflation was causing hardship for their families, and 62% held Trump responsible for high prices. His approval rating stood at 38%, the lowest for a sitting president on Election Day since 2008.
Voters felt the war most directly at the pump. Gas averaged $4.16 a gallon on Monday, up from $2.98 before the war began.
Trump has nonetheless left the door open to renewed escalation. Hours before polls closed, he told the Financial Times that the US had no immediate plans to bomb Iran but was “locked and loaded if we need to go.”
His remarks came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinted at an attack later this week. Reports also said Washington had told Gulf states to prepare for a short, intense campaign after the vote.
Since the US and “Israel” launched the aggression on February 28, the war has cost the US military at least $47.1 billion, according to a CENTCOM estimate that excludes extensive damage to US bases. The Pentagon has admitted to at least 21 US soldiers killed.
Hezbollah Categorically Denies Syrian Accusations: We Aim at Confronting Israeli Enemy, Not Undermining Syria’s Stability
Al-Manar | November 3, 2026
Hezbollah’s Media Relations Office issued a statement to comment on the claims made by the Syrian Internal Security Forces, reiterating that the Party has no presence or affiliations in Syria.
What follows is the full text of the statement:
Hezbollah’s Media Relations Office categorically and in detail denies the accusations contained in the statement issued by the Syrian Internal Security Forces concerning the alleged connection of a purported cell to the party. It reiterates that Hezbollah has no presence or affiliations whatsoever on Syrian territory and has no connection to any activity that undermines Syria’s security and stability.
The repeated accusations and the invocation of Hezbollah’s name in such cases do not alter the reality of its firm and clear position, which it has repeatedly declared. Hezbollah’s compass is confronting the “Israeli” enemy, which is intensifying its attacks on Lebanon and Syria and continues to occupy their territories. Accordingly, confronting this enemy and its expansionist schemes remains the highest priority around which efforts and positions should be unified, away from accusations that serve no one but its interests.
Trump claims funding to Israel ending in 2026 as merger of Israeli–US armies looms
The Cradle | November 3, 2026
US President Donald Trump said on 3 November that he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed that Washington would halt its billions in yearly aid to Tel Aviv after the end of this year.
“Now, as far as paying Israel, Bibi Netanyahu and I have made a deal that we give Israel $4 billion a year, and we made a deal months ago that we’re stopping,” the US president told Fox News.
“We’ve already agreed that by the end of this year we won’t be paying Israel. Now we’ll help Israel if they need it,” he added.
He went on to say that Israel does not “need it.”
“Why should we suffer the slings from lunatics like an El-Sayed when they don’t need it? It’s a bad, it’s a bad talking point,” he said, referring to Abdul el-Sayed – a democratic nominee for Michigan who has been critical of US financial support for Israel.
Israel receives $3.8 billion in US military aid a year. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that provides $3.8 billion in yearly US military aid to Israel does not expire until 2028.
Trump’s comments coincide with the start of the US midterms election, and come weeks before the US 2027 annual defense budget is expected to be approved before government funding expires on 11 December – which could be delayed due to disputes.
Washington is reportedly seeking $1.5 trillion in defense funding from Congress for 2027.
Last month, Netanyahu alluded to a halt in US funds for Israel. “If you think we’re going to continue receiving what I secured twice, and that’s tens of billions of dollars in American aid for the defense budget, prepare yourselves and get used to the fact that it won’t happen because America has changed,” he said.
Months earlier, plans for a US–Israeli military integration were revealed in Section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
Section 224 of the NDAA, entitled “United States–Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” proposes bilateral defense research and development, co-production of weapons, joint ventures, licensing agreements, and other US–Israeli military-industrial complex cooperation.
Bipartisan efforts by Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna to block the military integration have been shut down by Congress.
Greece bans protest over docking of Israeli cruise ship
MEMO | November 2, 2026
Greek authorities on the Aegean island of Syros banned a protest against an Israeli-owned cruise ship scheduled to dock Tuesday, daily Kathimerini reported Monday, Anadolu reports.
The Coast Guard said the planned demonstration against the docking of the Crown Iris, which can accommodate up to 2,000 passengers and 650 crew members, could lead to disturbances, including clashes between protesters and tourists.
The statement said demonstrations could still take place at alternative locations away from the waterfront.
It added that holding the protest at the initially designated locations “posed a severe threat to public security due to the potential of serious crimes being committed, particularly against human lives, bodily integrity and property … and to the area’s social and economic activity.”
The Syros Anti-War Initiative had called for a demonstration along the waterfront of the island’s capital, Ermoupoli, shortly before the ship’s scheduled arrival for a day visit Tuesday morning.
The group said the protest aimed “to express our full solidarity with the Palestinian people and all the peoples of the region.”
“We will send a clear message that genocidal war criminals and their supporters are unwelcome on our island,” the group said.
Israel elections: More Arab votes, same Zionist consensus
By Mouin Rabbani | The New Arab | November 2, 2026
Israel’s 27 October election, we were repeatedly informed, would be the “most consequential” in the state’s history. Why, however, this was the case was left unstated.
Indeed, Israel’s most consequential policies, most prominently its illegal occupation of Arab territories, its apartheid regime, and a genocide against the Palestinian people now in its fourth year, were not up for debate between the main candidates. A continued rejection of Palestinian rights, and an increasingly aggressive and expansionist regional posture, in fact represented one of the few areas of agreement between the rival coalitions.
The issues that most bitterly divided them, namely the future of the Israeli judiciary, the military conscription of ultra-Orthodox religious youth, and the formation of a state commission of inquiry into the 7 October 2023 attacks, may be of significance to the Israeli Jewish public. But taken together, these hardly qualify for the dramatic characterisation of the elections adopted by so many foreign journalists.
A better explanation for the superlatives is that it was widely anticipated that the Israeli voter would put a definitive end to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s career, and additionally rebuke National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, his compulsively extremist partners in crime. In performing its assigned role, the electorate would restore the Beautiful Israel of the liberal imagination, “the only democracy in the Middle East” with “the most moral army in the world”.
Has anything really change?
Shorn of Israel’s toxic leaders, the Gaza Genocide could be consigned to the memory hole, and things return to normal, where Israeli crimes could be glazed over with statements of “concern” and platitudes about the Zionist state’s “right to defend itself”, “right to exist”, and right to do as it pleases.
If the initial exit polls appeared to validate such aspirations, the actual results revealed the above scenario to be yet another exercise in wishful thinking by those who refuse to recognise Israeli realities. Netanyahu’s Likud, although diminished, comfortably emerged as the largest party, and those even further to the right successfully retained their previous levels of popular support and parliamentary representation.
Put differently, the Israeli Jewish public liked what it saw during Netanyahu’s most recent premiership and, as a gesture of appreciation, gave his party and the coalition it leads more votes than its Zionist rival. Netanyahu became Israel’s longest-serving leader in 2019. Noxious as he is to the rest of the planet, Netanyahu is today the embodiment and personification of the state he leads.
The above notwithstanding, the Likud-led coalition failed to achieve victory because it did not secure a parliamentary majority. Although parties that ran on a platform of removing Netanyahu from office will collectively have the numbers to achieve this objective, the rival coalition led by Gadi Eisenkot received fewer votes and fewer seats than Netanyahu’s.
The incumbent did not win, but the challenger clearly lost.
The explanation for this anomaly is to be found in Israel’s Jewish supremacist regime. From the outset, Eisenkot made clear that he rejected the inclusion of any Palestinian-led party in his coalition so as not to tarnish its Zionist credentials.
Under normal circumstances, the structural exclusion of Israel’s Palestinian citizens from meaningful political participation is a prerequisite for electoral success. But these are not normal times.
The Arab vote
The ceaseless demagoguery, incitement, and vicious repression towards this community by Israel’s outgoing government, particularly when viewed through the prism of the Gaza genocide and rampant pogroms throughout the West Bank, raised genuine fears that Israel has more in store for its Palestinian citizens than the apartheid regime that has ruled over them since the late 1940s.
Responding to this existential challenge, Palestinian citizens voted in unprecedented numbers, and the parties that represent their interests secured enough seats to deprive either coalition of a working majority.
In any other country, refusing to govern with minority parties as a matter of racial and political principle would be called by its proper name. But for Israel there is always an exception to established norms, and in this case it extends to the use of common vocabulary. Thus the former US peace processor Aaron David Miller, ever Israel’s dutiful lawyer, helpfully explained to his readers that Israel is a “preferential democracy”. Think of it as the political equivalent of three Michelin stars, and never say apartheid.
Where things go from here is hard to predict and will be shaped by a mix of opportunism, backroom dealing, back-stabbing, and U-turns.
Eisenkot, for example, is not averse to partnership with Netanyahu, and was in fact a key member of Israel’s genocide cabinet during 2023-2024. If Netanyahu can prevail upon him to join forces once again, for example in response to the widely anticipated resumption of Israel’s war against Iran, this would have the added benefit of taking much of the wind out of the opposition’s sails.
This is also said to be Washington’s preferred scenario, which views such a coalition as a formula for stable government. If so, the Trump administration doesn’t seem to understand, or perhaps understands only too well, that Netanyahu will use it as a transitional steppingstone to new elections from which he anticipates emerging with an expanded mandate.
Alternatively, either Netanyahu or Eisenkot could engineer defections from the opposing coalition. While this is entirely plausible, the numbers required for success are difficult to reach. More to the point, in a reality where everyone detests everyone else, gaining a new partner may well mean losing an existing one. That would mean back to square one.
The simplest solution, of course, would be for Eisenkot to incorporate the Palestinian-led parties into his coalition, which would give him an unassailable parliamentary majority. Their requirements for joining are rather modest, and although he has replaced his slogan of “a Zionist government” with an openness to any party that accepts four specific conditions, these are, arguably by design, a non-starter for at least one of these parties in a reality where he would need the support of both.
In other words, it remains very far from clear that Eisenkot would rather win with Palestinian backing than lose without it.
The Palestinian question
The irony is that it was none other than Netanyahu who, at the beginning of this decade, was the first Israeli leader to offer an Arab party participation in government. Doubly ironic when one considers that the party in question, the United Arab List led by Mansour Abbas, has its roots in the Muslim Brotherhood.
The gambit to partner with an offspring of what we are repeatedly told is the devil incarnate failed, but as a result, Abbas became a minister without portfolio in the right-wing government formed by Naftali Bennett.
Short of forming a government, Eisenkot may seek to forge informal parliamentary majorities, including the Palestinian-led parties, to pass legislation and appoint parliamentary officials to bolster his coalition’s prospects in new and early elections. Even this may, however, prove too much for certain parties in this “preferential democracy”.
More importantly, the conventional wisdom is that the main beneficiary of another election will be Netanyahu. Not least because the combination of ceaseless demagoguery, incitement, and repression against Israel’s Palestinians citizens, including disqualifications by its discredited judiciary and growing demands that “Arabs” be stripped of their voting rights, will have an impact.
Together with the deliberate marginalisation from the political process by both coalitions, a significant reduction in Palestinian voting numbers is widely expected.
Perhaps the most important takeaway from Israel’s recent elections is that the uniparty has once again triumphed. Its key leaders may be bitter rivals on matters affecting Israeli Jewish life, but when it comes to relations with the Palestinians, whether the millions disenfranchised and actively persecuted in the occupied territories, or the millions who are citizens of Israel but not considered legitimate members of its body politic, one struggles to identify a meaningful distinction.
Ultimately, Israeli politics do not operate in a vacuum. Decades of impunity have conditioned the Israeli electorate to believe that extremism pays handsome dividends and comes without consequence.
It is high time to discard illusions about the Zionist state, deal with it as it actually exists, and end the state of exception it has enjoyed once and for all.
Mouin Rabbani is Managing Editor of Jadaliyya and author of Gaza Apocalypse (OR Books 2026).
Follow Mouin on X: @MouinRabbani
