Who is Responsible for Last Night’s Strikes in Syria?

A matter of hours after Trump addressed Assad’s use of chemical weapons on civilians in Syria, airstrikes were carried out on a Homs air base by an unknown force. Is this the “big price” Trump promised Assad would pay for his chemical attacks? The U.S. says no – and many are looking at Israel, with its record of quietly striking Syrian targets, as another possible solution for the Syrian whodunnit. More at Voice of America.

The Pentagon has denied Syrian claims the US attacked a Homs air base Sunday, hours after President Donald Trump tweeted “Animal Assad” would have a “big price to pay” for an alleged chemical weapons attack in the city of Douma…

On Sunday, Trump said there would be a “big price to pay” after an alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, near the capital Damascus on Saturday, which the US blamed on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

In a series of tweets, Trump also criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin and Tehran, saying “Russian and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad.”

A new military strike could also increase tensions with Russia…

Analysts said it seemed unlikely Mr. Trump would target Russian forces based in Syria, a move that would ignite a dangerous conflict with Moscow. Mr. Trump will also have to consider what impact his response would have on other rivals like North Korea, which might view a decision not to strike Mr. Assad as another sign the U.S. is pulling back from conflicts around the world.

The Russian military accused Israel of launching deadly airstrike on an air base in central Syria overnight Monday, charging that two Israeli warplanes launched eight missiles at the Iran-operated airbase in Syria’s central Homs province from Lebanese airspace.The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) issued no official response to allegations that it was behind the attack that reportedly killed 14 people, among them regime-allied Iranian forces.Syria’s state-run SANA news agency first said the attack was a “suspected US attack,” but later withdrew all reference to America as Washington and France both denied involvement.

U.S. or Russia: Who’s in Charge of the Middle East These Days?

The recent chemical attacks in Syria may have already complicated America’s plan to disengage from the region, but will this also complicate Russia’s plan to become the new leading power in Syria along with Turkey and Iran? Israel needs to know, and the U.S. response to the chemical attacks may prove a more firm answer to this question than last week’s Ankara Summit with Russian President Putin, Turkey’s Erdogan, and Iran’s Rouhani.

The continuum from Iran to Lebanon, in effect, gives Tehran a border with Israel via Hezbollah. That we knew already. But it also gives Moscow the same leverage. Why would Moscow want a lever over Israel? To stop Israel from providing strategic assistance to the countries above Iran and below the Russian Caucasus. Georgia and Azerbaijan. Israel wants those countries to stay strong as a spoiler in Iran’s backyard.

The Ankara summit, which included the Russian and Iranian presidents, is part of Erdogan’s canny choreography and it will help to keep the West anxious. It also enables the Turkish president to portray himself as a relentless challenger of the West and allows building a connection with his domestic enemies such as the anti-American Kemalists and the left.

Few seem to have cared that the trilateral Ankara summit ended with nothing decided and nothing resolved.

American military involvement in Syria is something that Israel hasn’t concealed its desire for, and Israel expressed its dismay over Trump’s decision to withdraw American forces from Syria…

On the other hand, Israel needs Russian cooperation and coordination with the Russian air force, which operates in Syria, if it is to attack Syrian territory unimpeded. This need has already found expression in the Israeli silence in the face of the poisoning in Britain of Sergei Skripal…

Can the EU Handle Another Term for Hungary’s Viktor Orban?

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban of the far-right Fidesz party has won a landslide victory in Hungary and will continue on for a third term in power. Orban ran a campaign characterized by criticism of migrants and George Soros. His time in office so far has led to what many consider a process of democratic backsliding in Hungary, and his re-election may prove to be a crucible for the EU. More at Al-Jazeera.

Under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán… Hungary has become an increasingly autocratic and pro-Russian state—and it’s one that also happens to be in nato.

In addition to the threat of Russian adventurism, nato is facing a new menace, and the enemy is within. The alliance of 29 states bound by a pledge of collective defense has, particularly since the conclusion of the Cold War, defined itself by a set of common values and a membership composed of human rights-respecting democracies. The accuracy of this self-conception preceding the fall of the Berlin Wall was at times debatable. Today, it may be falling apart.

Since returning as prime minister in 2010, Orbán and his Fidesz party have chipped away at Hungary’s democratic checks and balances, curbed judicial independence and clamped down on the independent media. Hungary’s democratic backsliding has been accompanied by a drumbeat of xenophobic rhetoric, directed against refugees, Brussels and George Soros.

The EU, used to grappling with Brexit, is now confronting a country at the heart of the continent making an exit from the club’s liberal values, but continuing to pick up the cheques.

Orban’s warning that Muslim immigrants would “overrun” Europe follows gains made by like-minded parties across the continent over the past year, including Austria’s Freedom Party and the League and the Five Star Movement in Italy. Hungary, like its other central European peers, has no significant Muslim population. The European Parliament is set to vote later this year on whether it should strip Budapest of its EU voting rights over backsliding on democracy.

Is Sinclair Broadcast Group a Threat to Independent News?

A liberal watchdog group is now airing a critique of Sinclair Broadcast Group on Sinclair’s own airtime, but Sinclair will be sandwiching the message between two rebuttals of its own.

Sinclair Broadcast Group is the focus of a national debate on the news media – centering on the question of which news, and whose news, is fake news. Sinclair, which owns hundreds of small, local news outlets across the country, has been criticized for requiring all its anchors to read certain conservative news items verbatim.

Propaganda.” “Authoritarian.” “A brainwashed cult.”

This is how some in the media have described Sinclair’s recent promotional warning against “fake news.”

They couldn’t be more wrong — if not outright dishonest — in the way the Sinclair promo is being portrayed.

If these were read during a newscast, that would be one thing. But these were promos and were not presented as news.

In many ways, this media battle—left versus right, establishment versus populist, city versus rural—reflects our growing political divide. Only one arena of consensus has appeared to remain amidst this vitriolic battle: most of us have continued to cite our confidence in local news media.

The reasons for this are pretty obvious. Local news can get messy and divisive, but it’s usually quite practical. It’s grounded in fact and circumstance, to a degree the abstracted nature of our national political conversations cannot be…
But what happens as small to midsize newspapers and media stations go out of business, or look to groups like Sinclair for financial backing? It seems that the primary problem with Sinclair is not any attempt to influence local stories, but rather in its trying to refocus our attention—once again—on the national and on the partisan.

The Soviet-style propagandists are not dead. Technology did not kill them…could not kill them. Rather, they are newly empowered by it. We are witnessing the invasion of the Zombie Media, the undead lurching forward to try to restore a time when morally-bankrupt regimes saw facts both as optional and an obstacle that sometimes had to be disposed by their legions of truth-eaters.

What Will Congress Ask Mark Zuckerberg at His First Senate Hearing?

After the fallout from the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and with fresh memories of Facebook’s role in the spreading of misinformation during the 2016 elections, Mark Zuckerberg is on his way to Washington to testify before Congress for the first time. He’s expected to face tough questions and the hearing may play a role in shaping the future of the debate on data regulation. Americans have a lot of questions for Zuckerberg, but will he have any good answers? More at ABC News.

…expect members of Congress to ask difficult and sensational questions designed to put the executive on the defensive. They’ll have no shortage of transgressions to focus on. There’s the fake news that spread on the platform throughout the 2016 campaign and the ways in which Russian operatives have used Facebook to try to manipulate U.S. voters. Or how Facebook, which is the second-largest online ad company in the world, allowed advertisers to market explicitly to people’s bigotries, as their software suggested ad-targeting terms like “Jew haters” and “threesome rape.”

For Facebook, Tuesday is being seen as a kind of dreaded final exam.

That’s when Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive, will swap out his trademark gray T-shirts for a suit and tie, and embark on a two-day marathon of testimony on Capitol Hill. His goal? To apologize…

Internal staff has pushed Mr. Zuckerberg to answer lawmakers’ questions directly, and not to appear overly defensive. Their goal is to make Mr. Zuckerberg appear as humble, agreeable and as forthright as possible, the people close to the preparations said.

Zuckerberg, who for years has resisted calls to testify before Congress, is likely to face tough questions from lawmakers over two days of congressional hearings at the Capitol. Kennedy, for one, said he has “many, many questions,” including whether users should be able to “erase” their digital footprint on Facebook and whether they should have more control over the data that Facebook collects about them.

Who Will Light Israel’s Independence Day Torches?

Who should receive the honor of lighting one of Israel’s Independence Day torches? It is proving to be a less straightforward question than one might think. While there was talk of having a representative of the diaspora light a torch, the plan didn’t materialize. Inviting the Honduran president to light one seems to have been a PR mistake. And what about Bibi’s torch? Some people would prefer he not get one.

The “will she, won’t she?” question over “Big Bang Theory” star Mayim Bialik’s participation in this year’s torch-lighting ceremony on Independence Day eve has been resolved — she won’t, because the invitation was issued too late… In the end, the committee decided not to have a Diaspora representative at all this year, the report said.

When Culture and Sports Minister Miri Regev announced excitedly that Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez would be lighting a torch at Israel’s 70th anniversary celebration, some could have been excused for asking – with all due respect to Honduras – is this the best we could do?

Forget for a minute questions about Hernandez’s and Honduras’s human rights record. Honduras is also not exactly a significant world power.

Some politicians are like children: they crave attention, and have little shame. Not even the solemnity of Independence Day could make them behave. Netanyahu’s greediness – he must speak in the ceremony, he must be in the limelight, he must not let anyone else preside over anything of importance – soured this year’s main Independence Day event. This is not much different than him getting whiskey and cigars from wealthy friends: Netanyahu craves something. Netanyahu must have it. Netanyahu is not embarrassed to seem petty, manipulative, juvenile, pushy. He is a party pooper. If this was my party, I’d disinvite him. When it’s the Nation’s party, a Prime Minister must be tolerated.

Today’s Hot Issues

Who is Responsible for Last Night’s Strikes in Syria? U.S. or Russia: Who’s in Charge of the Middle East These Days? Can the EU Handle Another Term for Hungary’s Viktor Orban? Is Sinclair Broadcast Group a Threat to Independent News? What Will Congress Ask Mark Zuckerberg at His First Senate Hearing? Who Will Light Israel’s Independence Day Torches?