coalition

New York City, United States – Sitting in a room of hundreds of Jewish New Yorkers, Zohran Mamdani received cheers and applause at the Erev Rosh Hashanah service of progressive Brooklyn synagogue Kolot Chayeinu on a Monday evening last month.

This was one of the Democratic mayoral nominee’s recent appearances at synagogues and events over the Jewish High Holy Days, and a visible step towards navigating a politically charged line: increasingly engaging the largest concentration of Jewish people in any metropolitan area in the United States, and holding firmly anti-Zionist views before the general election on November 4.

Historically, Mamdani has held a strong stance on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, even founding a chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine during his undergraduate days at Bowdoin College. A little more than a decade later, as Mamdani’s name began to gain recognition, his longstanding unapologetically pro-Palestinian stance became a rallying force behind his platform as well as a point of criticism from opponents.

Mamdani received endorsements and canvassing support from progressive Jewish organisations like Bend the Arc, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Action and Jews for Racial and Economic Justice (JFREJ), organisations that have each confronted Israel’s role in the war in Gaza through statements on their websites.

Simultaneously, he has sustained attacks from far-right activists, Jewish Democrats on Capitol Hill and Zionist activist groups for his firm support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and refusal to call Israel a Jewish state.

But despite mixed responses, the polls are clear: Mamdani is leading among Jewish voters overall in a multiway race.

‘No group is a monolith’

In July, a publicly released research poll by Zenith Research found that Mamdani led with a 17-point lead among Jews and by Jewish subgroups. In the scenario of Mayor Eric Adams dropping from the race, Mamdani still dominated, 43-33.

“Me being Jewish, I understand that there are many cleavages within the Jewish community,” said Adam Carlson, founding partner of Zenith Research. “As a pollster, one of my big things is that no group is a monolith, and if you have a large enough sample size, you can break it out and glean some nuances … what we found was a better-than-expected result for Mamdani among Jewish voters in New York City.”

Beth Miller, political director of the political advocacy organisation Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Action and a member of Kolot Chayeinu, shared what it was like to witness a fraction of this support at the Erev Rosh Hashanah that Mamdani attended last month.

“He was basically swarmed at the end because people were so excited that he was there,” said Miller. “And that’s not because he’s a celebrity, it’s because people are excited about what we can all build together if he becomes mayor.”

JVP Action, a day-one endorser of Mamdani, represents one organisation among a growing group of Jewish supporters for Mamdani, like JFREJ, a group that has played a part in spearheading canvassing efforts among the diverse Jewish communities of NYC.

JFREJ’s electoral arm, The Jewish Vote, has supported Mamdani since he was first running for state assembly in 2020. Since then, JFREJ members and Mamdani have worked, canvassed and protested together.

Alicia Singham Goodwin, political director of JFREJ, has personally been arrested at protests alongside Mamdani.

“That’s the kind of thing that gives me faith in his commitments,” Goodwin told Al Jazeera regarding the arrests. “He’s willing to take on big risks for the things that matter.”

JFREJ has played a large role in spreading Mamdani’s message by knocking on doors and phone banking Jewish voters.

“We care about what our neighbours are worried about, excited and hopeful for — what they need for their families, and we’re ready to meet them there with our analysis of how the city needs to move to get to affordable housing, universal childcare, or to combat the real rise in anti-Semitism and hate violence,” said Goodwin. “We believe that Zohran is the strongest candidate for that, as well as for all the other issues we talk about.”

Courting the Jewish vote

While there is no doubt that the canvassing army of 50,000 volunteers has served Mamdani well, the mayoral hopeful has also been strategic in his pursuit of the Jewish vote.

“He has definitely modulated his rhetoric and has made a concerted effort to reach out to liberal congregations,” said Val Vinokur, professor of literary studies and director of the minor in Jewish culture at The New School. “This has made him more palatable to some progressive Zionists, much to the outrage of his anti-Zionist supporters.”

One example of Mamdani’s subdued rhetoric includes his response to continued backlash over the phrase “globalise the intifada”.

The phrase, used by pro-Palestinian activists, sparked tension between Mamdani and parts of the Jewish community. To some, it represents a call for solidarity with Palestinian resistance, while others view it as anti-Semitic and violent.

Mamdani resisted rejecting the phrase before the June election, but The New York Times reported that since then, he said he would “discourage” its use.

On the second anniversary of the Gaza war, Mamdani posted a four-paragraph statement on X where he acknowledged the atrocities of Hamas’s attack, and then called Israel’s response genocide and ended on a note of commitment to human rights.

“It got s*** on from all sides,” said Carlson. “He made nobody happy, which in my mind, is kinda the correct way to go about it … Sometimes, pleasing nobody is the job of the mayor, and I think he’s learning that now. It’s like a microcosm of what he’s about to face as mayor, assuming he wins. Sometimes, you have to piss off everybody a little bit for compromises.”

Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism

As Carlson’s Zenith Research poll reflected, the NYC Jewish community has a wide diversity of opinion about politics and positions on Israel and Palestine. The community most clearly differentiates along lines of age, and secular versus conservative practice, but as Jewish support for Mamdani increases, it is evident that these divides are not always so distinct.

“While it’s true that there are major trends that younger American Jews are more progressive and sympathetic to Palestinians, it’s also true that for as long as Zionism has existed, there have been anti-Zionist Jews,” said Miller. “I learned a lot from elders who were in their 70s, 80s and 90s who have been anti-Zionist since Israel was created because they never felt that what they wanted or needed was an ethnostate to represent them.”

Alternatively, Zionist groups like Betar worldwide are troubled by these trends within the Jewish community of New York.

“It’s heartbreaking to see members of the Jewish community support Zohran Mamdani, who openly opposes Zionism — the national liberation movement of the Jewish people,” said Oren Magnezy, spokesperson of Betar worldwide.

Jonathan Boyarin, American anthropologist and Mann professor of modern Jewish studies at Cornell University, wondered whether anti-Zionism has done much to help Palestinians, but distinguished the line that Mamdani is walking.

“It’s been said that there are two kinds of people who confuse anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism: Zionists and anti-Semites. I don’t think Zohran Mamdani belongs in either of those categories,” said Boyarin.

‘New political moment’

Ultimately, experts like Vinokur predict Mamdani will win, barring a scenario in which Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa drops out. Regardless, Vinokur expects Mamdani to secure the Jewish vote.

“He will win the Jewish vote despite and not because of his anti-Zionist background,” said Vinokur. “Younger Jewish voters are overwhelmingly liberal, have been galvanised by the dynamism of his campaign, and ultimately want to make the city a more livable, affordable, and equitable place.”

Mamdani’s message and campaign were celebrated at the JFREJ annual gala fundraiser, the Mazals. NYC Comptroller Brad Lander and Mamdani were honoured together during a night filled with music, ritual and tradition with more than 1,000 attendees.

“I would say it was probably the largest single gathering of Jews for Zohran,” said Goodwin. “They cement this new political moment that we’re in, where people like JFREJ members, movements like ours, are not fringe or aspirational, but we are popular among a majority of New Yorkers.”

Right-wing Japan Innovation Party says it will support the governing LDP, allowing Sanae Takaichi to be voted in as leader.

Hardline conservative Sanae Takaichi appears set to become Japan’s first female premier as the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) prepares to sign a coalition deal.

Hirofumi Yoshimura, coleader of the Japan Innovation Party, known as Ishin, said on Monday that his right-wing party was prepared to back a Takaichi premiership, providing the LDP with the support it needs to remain in power.

The LDP had appeared on the cusp of losing power when Japan’s legislature meets for an extraordinary session to vote for the next prime minister on Tuesday.

“I told Takaichi that we should move forward together,” Yoshimura told reporters in Osaka as he made the 11th-hour announcement. He added that he would meet Takaichi at 6pm local time (09:00 GMT) to sign the agreement.

The deal clears the way for Takaichi to win Tuesday’s vote, which will see her replace incumbent Shigeru Ishiba, who has resigned.

Political turmoil

Takaichi, a 64-year-old China hawk from the right-wing party, became leader of the LDP earlier this month.

Her bid to become Japan’s first female premier was disrupted when the centrist Komeito party ended a 26-year alliance with the LDP.

Coming just days after Takaichi’s election as the LDP leader, the move plunged the country into a political crisis.

The Buddhist-backed Komeito said the LDP had failed to tighten funding rules in the wake of a slush fund scandal. It was also unnerved by Takaichi’s ultraconservative positions, including a history of harsh rhetoric on China, despite Takaichi having toned that down recently.

The deal between the LDP and Ishin would deliver a combined 231 seats in the lower house of parliament, two short of a majority, meaning the new coalition would still need support from other parties to push through legislation.

But should the vote for Ishiba’s replacement go to a second-round run-off, Takaichi would only need support from more MPs than the other candidate.

Muted response from women

Despite Takaichi appearing set to break the glass ceiling to become the first female premier, many Japanese women were not celebrating her rise.

“The prospect of a first female prime minister doesn’t make me happy,” sociologist Chizuko Ueno posted on X, saying her leadership “doesn’t mean Japanese politics becomes kinder to women”.

Chiyako Sato, a political commentator for the Mainichi newspaper, said Takaichi’s policies were “extremely hawkish and I doubt she would consider policies to recognize diversity”.

Liberal Democratic Party leader Sanae Takaichi appears back on track to become Japan’s first female prime minister.

Japan’s governing party and the main opposition are set to form a coalition government, setting the stage for Sanae Takaichi to become the country’s first female prime minister, local media report.

Sanae Takaichi, the leader of the conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), and Hirofumi Yoshimura, the head of the smaller right-leaning Japan Innovation Party (JIP), known as Ishin, are set to sign an agreement on their alliance on Monday, Japan’s Kyodo news agency reported on Sunday.

Takaichi became leader of the governing LDP earlier this month, but her bid to become Japan’s first female premier was derailed by the collapse of her governing coalition.

Since then, the LDP has been working to cobble together a different political alliance, putting her chances for the top job back on track.

“The LDP has entrusted Takaichi with handling the coalition matter, while the JIP will hold an executive board gathering in Osaka on Sunday and a plenary meeting of lawmakers the following day before giving final approval to the agreement with the LDP,” Kyodo reported.

Japan’s leading Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper also said that Takaichi and Yoshimura were “likely to sign a coalition agreement after talks on Monday”.

Reports of a new coalition come after the LDP’s junior partner, the Komeito party, left the governing coalition after 26 years, plunging the country into a political crisis.

The sealing of an alliance between the LDP and JIP could lead to Takaichi’s election as premier as early as Tuesday, but the parties are still two seats short of a majority to pass the vote.

Should the vote go to a second-round run-off, however, Takaichi would only need support from more MPs than the other candidate.

The moves to form a coalition come just days before the expected arrival in Japan of United States President Donald Trump.

Trump is scheduled to travel to Japan before the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in South Korea.

Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof joins Talk to Al Jazeera at a pivotal moment for Europe and the Middle East. After his coalition collapsed, he reflects on leading the Netherlands through crises at home and abroad.

From the war in Gaza and sanctions on Israel to NATO, migration and United States President Donald Trump’s stance on Ukraine, Schoof gives rare insight into how the Netherlands navigates global fault lines. A politically unaffiliated leader and former intelligence chief, he speaks candidly about power, justice and Europe’s future.

BRUSSELS — The greenlight given by President Trump on U.S. backup for a European-led force to police any future peace agreement in Ukraine vastly improves the likelihood it might succeed.

European leaders said Trump offered his backing during a call they held ahead of his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday.

The effectiveness of the operation, drawn up by the so-called coalition of the willing of around 30 countries supporting Ukraine, hinges on U.S. backup with airpower or other military equipment that European armed forces do not have, or only in short supply.

EU leaders regularly have underlined how the United States is “crucial” to the success of the security operation dubbed Multinational Force Ukraine. But the Trump administration has long refused to commit, perhaps keeping its participation on hold as leverage in talks with Russia.

After a meeting Wednesday between Trump and European leaders, European Council President Antonio Costa welcomed “the readiness of the United States to share with Europe the efforts to reinforce security conditions once we obtain a durable and just peace for Ukraine.”

French President Emmanuel Macron said Trump had insisted NATO must not be part of these security guarantees, but the U.S. leader agreed “the United States and all the (other) parties involved should take part.”

“It’s a very important clarification,” Macron said.

Trump did not publicly confirm he would allow U.S. backup, and no details of possible U.S. support were made public, but U.S. Vice President JD Vance sat in on the coalition meeting for the first time.

The Multinational Force Ukraine

More than 200 military planners have worked for months on ways to ensure a future peace should the war, now in its fourth year, finally halt. Ukraine’s armed forces also have been involved, and British personnel have led reconnaissance work inside Ukraine.

The exact size of the force has not been made public, although Britain has said it could number 10,000 to 30,000 troops. It must be enough to deter Russian forces, but also of a realistic size for nations that shrank their militaries after the Cold War and are now rearming.

The “reassurance” force’s mission “will be to strengthen Ukraine’s defenses on the land, at sea, and in the air because the Ukrainian Armed Forces are the best deterrent against future Russian aggression,” U.K. Defence Secretary John Healey told lawmakers last month.

“It will secure Ukraine’s skies by using aircraft,” Healey said, “and it will support safer seas by bolstering the Black Sea Task Force with additional specialist teams.”

Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey launched that naval force a year ago to deal with mines in Black Sea waters.

The force initially will have its headquarters in Paris before moving to London next year. A coordination headquarters in Kyiv will be involved once hostilities cease and it deploys.

The impact of US participation

European efforts to set up the force have been seen as a first test of the continent’s willingness to defend itself and its interests, given Trump administration warnings that Europe must take care of its own security and that of Ukraine in future.

Still, U.S. forces clearly provide a deterrent that the Europeans cannot muster.

Details of what the U.S. might contribute were unknown, and Trump has changed his mind in the past, so it remains to be seen whether this signal will be enough to persuade more countries within the coalition to provide troops.

Greece has publicly rejected doing so. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said last month that those discussions were “somewhat divisive” and distracted from the goal of ending the war as soon as possible.

Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has said Rome won’t contribute troops, but she previously has underlined the importance of working with the U.S. on ending the conflict and called for the participation of an American delegation in force coordination meetings.

Cook writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Emma Burrows in London contributed to this report.

As violence and rights abuses rage on, the coalition pledges to pursue a ‘secular, democratic’ and decentralised Sudan.

A Sudanese coalition led by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary group has announced it is establishing an alternative government in a challenge to the military-led authorities in the capital Khartoum, with the northeastern African country’s brutal civil war in its third year.

The group, which calls itself the Leadership Council of the Sudan Founding Alliance (TASIS), said RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan “Hemedti” Dagalo will chair the 15-member presidential council of the government, which includes regional governors.

Sudanese politician Mohammed Hassan Osman al-Ta’ishi will serve as prime minister, TASIS said.

“On the occasion of this historic achievement, the leadership council extends its greetings and congratulations to the Sudanese people who have endured the flames of devastating wars for decades,” the coalition said in a statement.

“It also renews TASIS’s commitment to building an inclusive homeland, and a new secular, democratic, decentralized, and voluntarily unified Sudan, founded on the principles of freedom, justice and equality.”

The new self-proclaimed government could deepen divisions and lead to competing institutions as the war rages on between the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF).

In May, the Sudanese army said it had completely driven the RSF out of the capital, Khartoum.

The fighting since April 2023 has killed tens of thousands and displaced nearly 13 million people, according to United Nations estimates, resulting in one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world.

In recent months, the violence has been intensifying in the western region of Darfur, where the RSF has been besieging the city of el-Fasher, compounding hunger in the area.

Rights groups have accused both the RSF and SAF of rights abuses. Earlier this year, Amnesty International said RSF fighters were inflicting “widespread sexual violence” on women and girls to “assert control and displace communities across the country”.

Earlier this year, the US imposed sanctions on Hemedti, accusing the RSF of committing “serious human rights abuses” under his leadership, including executing civilians and blocking humanitarian aid.

Sudan has seen growing instability since longtime President Omar al-Bashir was removed from power in 2019 after months of antigovernment protests.

In October 2021, the Sudanese military staged a coup against the civilian government of Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, leading to his resignation in early 2022.

Sudan’s army chief, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Hemedti had shared power after the coup, but then began fighting for control of the state and its resources in April 2023.

Although the rivalry between al-Burhan and Hemedti does not appear to be ideological, numerous attempts to reach a peaceful resolution to the crisis have failed.

July 22 (UPI) — A coalition of school districts, teachers’ unions, nonprofits and parents has filed a lawsuit accusing the Trump administration of illegally withholding nearly $7 billion in Congress-approved education funding.

In the lawsuit filed Monday, the coalition asks a U.S. District Court in Rhode Island to compel the Department of Education and the White House Office of Management and Budget to release the funding, which supports low-income students, teacher training, English learners, immigrant students and after-school programs.

According to the lawsuit, the Department of Education is required to disburse Elementary and Secondary Education Act funds on July 1. But on June 30, states were informed that the department would not be disbursing nearly $7 billion in ESEA funds and that a new policy had been adopted requiring a review to first be conducted to ensure the money is spent “in accordance with the president’s priorities,” the lawsuit states, citing the letter.

The Trump administration provided the states with neither a timeline nor assurances that the funds would be released, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration has been dismantling the Department of Education, in line with President Donald Trump‘s March executive order seeking to shutter the department and return its authorities to the states.

Last week, the conservative-leaning Supreme Court approved Trump’s mass firings at the department. At the same time, 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration over its freezing of billions of dollars in education funds.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten described the Trump administration’s freeze on Monday as throwing a “monkey wrench” at millions of U.S. educators.

“These are long-term, school-based programs, already passed by Congress and signed into law by the president,” she said in a statement.

“Since day one, the Trump administration has attacked public education, undermining opportunity in America. Now it is trying to lawlessly defund education unilaterally through rampant government overreach. It’s not only morally repugnant: the administration lacks the legal right to sacrifice kids’ futures at the alter of ideology.”

Among the plaintiffs are Alaska’s largest school district, Anchorage School District; Cincinnati Public Schools and Fairbanks North Star Borough, among others.

July 20 (UPI) — Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who assumed office in October 2024, could face mounting political pressure as his ruling coalition is projected to lose its majority during elections for the House of Councilors on Sunday.

Ishiba acknowledged Sunday night to public broadcaster NHK that it would be difficult for the ruling coalition, an alliance of his Liberal Democratic Party and the Komeito Party, to secure the 50 seats in the House of Councilors election to maintain a majority.

Before the election, the LDP-Komeito coalition together held 66 of 125 seats up for grabs this cycle, but exit polls conducted by NHK with other national news outlets showed they are expected to only win somewhere between 32 and 51 seats in the upper house.

“The situation is severe, and we must accept it humbly and sincerely,” Ishiba said in remarks to NHK. He added that his party has a “responsibility” to fulfill the promises it made to voters, including raising wages more than inflation and measures to combat population decline.

The country’s national legislature, called the Diet, is comprised of two houses: the House of Councilors, and the more powerful lower house, called the House of Representatives, which is responsible for selecting the prime minister.

Ishiba became Japan’s prime minister last fall after winning the ruling LDP’s internal leadership election, replacing Fumio Kishida, who stepped down amid declining approval and scandal ties.

Because the LDP held a majority in the lower house of parliament at the time, through its longstanding coalition with the Komeito party, Ishiba’s victory secured his elevation to the country’s top office.

Days after taking power, he called a snap general election in October 2024 in an effort to strengthen his mandate. Instead, voters handed his party a historic defeat: the LDP-Komeito coalition lost its majority in the lower chamber for the first time in over a decade, forcing Ishiba to lead a fragile minority government.

Now, Ishiba’s leadership is facing another major test in Sunday’s upper house election, where exit polls suggest the ruling coalition is also on track to lose control of the legislature’s second chamber, which would make it difficult for the government to pass legislation.

Under Japanese law, a minority government can continue to rule as long as it avoids a no-confidence vote in the House of Representatives and because Japan’s opposition is often fragmented, it could be hard to oust a weakened ruling party. Still, it could lead to the possibility that Ishiba may choose to resign less than a year after becoming prime minister.

Masataka Furuya, chairman of the Central Election Management Committee, released a statement before voting Sunday, encouraging the public to participate in the voting process. As of 7:30 p.m. local time, the nationwide voter turnout rote for the election was 29.9%, lower than the previous election three years ago.

The back-to-back losses reflect growing voter dissatisfaction with the LDP under Ishiba, driven by economic stagnation, public frustration over immigration policy, and fatigue with the party’s decades-long grip on power.

“We hope that all voters will fully understand the significance of this regular election of the House of Councilors, actively participate in the voting, and exercise their precious vote with care,” the office of the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications said in a statement Sunday.

“We also ask that those involved in the voting and counting of the elections take strict and fair action and take the utmost care in managing and executing the elections.”

WASHINGTON — Confident that passage of President Trump’s signature legislation was all but assured, West Wing aides summoned holdouts in the House Republican caucus Wednesday to deliver a blunt message: Follow the president’s orders and get it done by Friday.

It was a call to action after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) directed his caucus to return to Washington from home districts around the country, braving flight delays due to storms in the capital to be back in time for a vote before the Fourth of July.

But the vote was in doubt, and signs emerged of cracks in a coalition otherwise firmly under Trump’s control.

“The president of the United States didn’t give us an assignment,” Rep. Derrick Van Orden, a Republican from Wisconsin, told reporters, using an expletive to suggest Trump was treating lawmakers like his minions. “I’m a member of Congress. I represent almost 800,000 Wisconsinites. Is that clear?”

Frustration within the Republican Party was coming from two disparate camps of a broad-tent coalition that have their own sets of grievances: fiscal hawks who believe the bill adds too much to the national debt, and lawmakers representing districts that heavily rely on Medicaid.

One GOP lawmaker who attended the White House meeting Wednesday, Rep. David Valadao of California, represents a Central Valley district with one of the highest percentages of Medicaid enrollment in the nation.

The president’s megabill, which he calls the “Big Beautiful Bill,” levies historic cuts to the healthcare program that could result in up to 12 million Americans losing health coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, gutting $1 trillion in funding and introducing a work requirement for enrollees of 80 hours per month until they turn 65 years old.

The legislation would also restrict state taxes on healthcare providers, known as the “provider tax,” an essential tool for many states in their efforts to supplement Medicaid funding. Several Republican lawmakers fear that provision could have devastating effects on rural hospitals.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, appearing Wednesday with other Democrats on the Capitol steps, denounces President Trump’s tax and spending bill.

(Bloomberg via Getty Images)

A handful of Republican lawmakers from North Carolina have bristled at the president’s pressure campaign, with Rep. Chuck Edwards telling Punchbowl News that the White House meeting “didn’t sway my opinion.” North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis was one of three Republicans who voted against the bill Tuesday, warning it would devastate his state. It still passed with a tie-breaking vote from Vice President JD Vance.

The vote was shaping up to be narrow in the House as well, where Johnson can afford to lose only three votes in order to pass the omnibus legislation.

A daylong debate on the House floor allowed for private negotiations to continue, ahead of a crucial procedural vote on rules that would be the last step before a final vote. But it was unclear whether the expressions of frustration and doubt Wednesday amounted to performance art in anticipation of the bill’s inevitable passage, or signaled a genuine threat to the bill.

Earlier Wednesday, after taking meetings at the White House, members of the House Freedom Caucus, a bloc founded to promote fiscal responsibility, also met with Johnson. The speaker emerged with a message of tempered optimism and later said he was hoping to secure a final vote Wednesday night.

“I feel very positive about the progress, we’ve had lots of great conversations,” Johnson told reporters, “but we can’t make everyone 100% happy. It’s impossible.”

“This is a deliberative body. It’s a legislative process by definition — all of us have to give up on personal preferences,” he said. “I’m never going to ask anyone to compromise core principles, but preferences must be yielded for the greater good. And that’s what I think people are recognizing and coming to grips with.”

Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, a member of the Freedom Caucus, had been highly critical of the Senate legislation. But he signaled an openness Wednesday afternoon to vote in favor of the bill, an indication that passage could be imminent.

Democrats are out of power across Washington and have no ability to stop the legislation. But many believe it could backfire on Republicans in the midterm elections next year.

“Every single Senate Republican is going to have to answer for these cruel and unpopular cuts this election,” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York said after the bill passed the Senate. “This is putting their majority at serious risk.”

Trump says the legislation encompasses his entire domestic agenda, extending tax cuts passed during his first term in 2017 and beefing up funding for border security, mass deportations and the Defense Department.

Cuts to Medicaid, as well as to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP, are intended to offset a fraction of the costs. But the CBO still estimates the legislation will add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, and hundreds of billions to the deficit, with other nonprofit budget trackers forecasting even higher figures.

Donald Trump’s coalition has always been a Frankenstein’s monster — stitched together from parts that were never meant to coexist.

Consider the contradictions: fast-food fanatics hanging out with juice-cleanse truthers chanting “Make America Healthy Again” between ivermectin doses, immigration hardliners mixing with business elites who are “tough on the border” until they need someone to clean their toilets or pick their strawberries, and hawkish interventionists spooning with America Firsters.

Dogs and cats living together — mass hysteria — you know the bit.

Navigating these differences was always going to be tricky. But in recent days — particularly following Israel’s bombing of Iran, an operation widely believed to have been greenlit by Trump — the tension has reached new highs.

Signs of strain were already emerging earlier this year. We got early hints of discord during the “Liberation Day” tariff fiasco — where Trump declared an “emergency” and imposed steep tariffs, only to suspend them after they riled markets and spooked his business-friendly backers.

The tariff blunder was a harbinger of things to come. But it was the House’s passage of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” — a budgetary monstrosity that self-respecting Freedom Caucus deficit hawks should’ve torched on principle — that truly exposed the rift.

Enter Elon Musk, the billionaire tech bro and MAGA ally, who publicly trashed both the bill and Trump in a flurry of posts. He even referenced Trump’s name reportedly appearing in Jeffrey Epstein’s files — a claim that, though unverified, was tantamount to “going nuclear.”

But before there was enough time to say “Republican civil war,” Musk deleted his mean tweets, adding to the evidence that this is still Trump’s party; that modern Republicans view deficits the way the rest of us view library late fees — technically real, but nothing to lose sleep over; and that ketamine is a hell of a drug.

The next internecine squabble was over immigration. Trump proudly ran on rounding ’em all up. Mass deportations! Load up the buses! But then it turned out that his rich buddies in Big Ag and Big Hospitality weren’t so keen on losing some of their best employees.

So Trump floated a carve out to protect some “very good, long time workers” in those particular industries.

It even started to look like some exemptions were coming — until his Department of Homeland Security said “no mas.” (The raids will presumably continue until the next time a farmer or hotelier complains to Trump in a meeting.)

But the real fissure involves some prominent America First non-interventionists who thought Trump was elected to end the “forever wars.”

In case you missed it, Israel has been going after Iran’s nuclear capabilities with the same gusto that Trump aide Stephen Miller applies to deporting Guatemalan landscapers, and Trump is all in, calling for an “unconditional surrender” of the Iranian regime.

This didn’t sit well with everyone in the MAGA coalition.

“I think we’re going to see the end of American empire,” warned Tucker Carlson on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast. “But it’s also going to end, I believe, Trump’s presidency — effectively end it — and so that’s why I’m saying this.”

And Carlson (co-founder of the Daily Caller, where I worked) didn’t stop there. “The real divide isn’t between people who support Israel and those who support Iran or the Palestinians,” he tweeted. “It’s between warmongers and peacemakers.”

Then he named names, alleging that Fox’s Sean Hannity, radio firebrand Mark Levin, media titan Rupert Murdoch and billionaire Trump donors Ike Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson were among the warmongers.

Trump hit back, calling Tucker “kooky” and repeating his new mantra: “IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON.”

It’s tempting to see this spat as the beginning of a schism — a break that might finally yield a coherent Trump Doctrine, at least, as it pertains to foreign policy (possibly returning the GOP to a more Reaganite or internationalist party). But that misunderstands the nature of Trump and his coalition.

These coalitional disagreements over public policy are real and important. But they mostly exist at the elite level. The actual Trump voter base? They care about only one thing: Donald Trump.

And Trump resists ideological straitjackets.

If Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu rubs him the wrong way next week (as he did by congratulating Joe Biden in 2020), or if Israel’s military campaign starts slipping in the polls, Trump could flip faster than a gymnast on Red Bull.

There is no coherent philosophy. No durable ideology. What we’re watching is a guy making it up as he goes along — often basing decisions on his “gut” or the opinion of the last guy who bent his ear.

So if you’re looking for a Trump Doctrine to explain it all — keep looking. There isn’t one.

There’s only Trump.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

He has been dubbed the “Dutch Donald Trump”.

Geert Wilders has pulled his Party for Freedom (PVV) out of the coalition that governs the Netherlands in a row over immigration policy.

It has plunged the NATO ally into political turmoil and new elections.

After years in opposition, the PVV won the most votes in 2023 by tapping into rising populism in Europe with promises to reduce immigration.

Wilders has pushed for a 10-point plan that calls for the militarisation of Dutch borders as well as the repatriation of all Syrian nationals – something his coalition partners rejected.

Before resigning, Prime Minister Dick Schoof labelled Wilders’s actions “irresponsible”, coming at a critical time for Europe.

So was this a reckless or strategic move by Wilders?

And will it deepen uncertainty in the region, only weeks before a NATO summit in The Hague?

Presenter:

Tom McRae

Guests: 

Henk van der Kolk – Professor of electoral politics at the University of Amsterdam

Zoe Gardner – Independent researcher covering migration policy

Pieter Cleppe – Editor-in-chief at BrusselsReport.eu

National Party and Liberal Party part ways after more than 60-year alliance following election defeat.

Australia’s National Party has split from its conservative coalition partner of more than 60 years, the Liberal Party, citing policy differences over renewable energy and following a resounding loss in the national elections this month.

“It’s time to have a break,” the National leader, David Littleproud, told reporters on Tuesday.

The split shows the pressure on Australia’s conservative parties after Anthony Albanese’s centre-left Labor Party won a historic second term in the May 3 election, powered by a voter backlash against United States President Donald Trump’s policies.

Under the longstanding partnership in state and federal politics, the Liberal and National coalition had shared power in governments, with the Nationals broadly representing the interests of rural communities and the Liberals contesting city seats.

“We will not be re-entering a coalition agreement with the Liberal Party after this election,” Littleproud said, citing policy differences.

Liberal Party leader Sussan Ley, who was installed in the role last week, had pledged to revisit all policies in the wake of the election loss. She said on Tuesday she was disappointed with the Nationals’ decision, which came after they had sought specific commitments.

“As the largest nongovernment political party, the Liberals will form the official opposition,” she added.

The Liberals were reduced to 28 out of 150 seats in the House of Representatives, their worst result, as Labor increased its tally to 94 from 77, registering its largest-ever majority in an election. The National Party retained its 15 seats.

The Liberal Party lost key city seats to independents supporting gender equality and action on climate change.

Ley, a former outback pilot with three finance degrees, was elected as the party’s first female leader after opposition leader Peter Dutton lost his seat in the election.

“She is a leader that needs to rebuild the Liberal Party; they are going on a journey of rediscovery, and this will provide them the opportunity to do that,” said Littleproud.

The Nationals remain committed to “having the door open” for more coalition talks before the next election, but would uphold the interests of rural Australians, he said.

The Nationals had failed to gain a commitment from Ley that her party would continue a policy taken to the election supporting the introduction of nuclear power, and also wanted a crackdown on the market power of Australia’s large supermarkets, and better telecommunications in the Outback.

Australia has the world’s largest uranium reserves but bans nuclear energy.

Littleproud said nuclear power was needed because Australia’s move away from coal to “renewables only” under the Labor government was not reliable.

Wind farm turbines “are tearing up our landscape, they are tearing up your food security”, he said.

Michael Guerin, chief executive of AgForce, representing farmers in Queensland state, said the urban-rural divide was worsening.

“Perhaps we’re seeing that in the political forum,” he said, adding the Liberals and Nationals both needed to rebuild.

Labor Party treasurer Jim Chalmers said the split in the opposition was a “nuclear meltdown”, and the Liberals would have a presence “barely bigger” than the cross-bench of 12 independents and minor parties when Parliament sits.