After much debate and parliamentary wrangling, the Knesset passed a law on Monday obligating non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that receive more than half of their funding from foreign governments to disclose the fact publicly. Foreign and domestic critics have vigorously denounced the law as anti-democratic and evidence of creeping “fascism” in the Jewish state. Meanwhile, on Tuesday, the U.S. Congress released a bipartisan report stating that an Israeli NGO funded by the State Department used its resources to aid the effort to unseat Netanyahu in Israel’s 2015 elections. Elliott Abrams comments:

In Israel, many leftist groups that endlessly attack not only the current government and its policies but their country’s legitimacy and the conduct of the IDF have been funded largely by European countries. The new Israeli law does not prevent [foreign funding], and does not interfere with free speech, but merely says the financial facts must be stated in all public communications by the recipient Israeli group. No doubt the net effect will be to undermine the credibility of such groups, or so it seems to me—and presumably to the new law’s drafters. If you learn Monday that the Netherlands loudly denounced Israel in the UN, and Tuesday that some Israeli group denouncing the government is funded by the Netherlands, you may well put two and two together. In any event, you ought to have the relevant information. . . . .

[In light of the recent Senate report], it any wonder that Israeli lawmakers on the right passed this law? Not only European governments but that of the U.S are in fact doing what Netanyahu denounced: meddling in Israel’s politics. The new law calls for transparency, and nothing more.

And next time you read about bad feeling between Netanyahu and Obama, remember that bipartisan Senate report. Netanyahu opposed Obama’s Iran deal. For this he was accused of meddling in American politics. What did the Obama administration do? It funded a campaign to get Netanyahu thrown out of office.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.