US Press
Washington reads a Gaza café strike and an Authority near insolvency
Graphic: Times of Palestine
Original Reporting
The Newsdesk gathers reporting from wire services and primary sources and rewrites every story in-house before publication. How our journalism is made →
The American papers arrived on Wednesday with two Palestinian stories on the same page: a strike that hit a café in Gaza's port a day after Jared Kushner's visit, and an accounting of how close the Palestinian Authority is to running out of money.
The New York Times led its Middle East file with the strike, and wrote what the timing does to the diplomacy: a deadly Israeli strike on Gaza raises doubts about the Trump peace plan, a day after the president's envoy came to advance a plan for demilitarising and rebuilding the Strip. The Israeli military said it had targeted Hamas commanders.
The same paper published the West Bank economy report that Palestinian readers will find the most consequential American journalism of the week — intensifying Israeli restrictions across every part of the territory's dealings, and open worry about whether the Authority can stay solvent. Times of Palestine has reported that account separately today.
Israel, Syria and an ally's patience#
The Israeli strike on a Syrian airbase drew unusually sharp American coverage.
Axios reported that Israel told the Trump administration the attack was aimed at preventing a Turkish military build-up in the area, and framed the episode as exacerbating tensions between three close American partners. Barak Ravid's headline said American frustration with Netanyahu is growing.
The Hill carried the administration's own voice: Tom Barrack, the ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria and Iraq, called the eight Israeli strikes on the Abu al-Duhur base an unnecessary escalation.
Responsible Statecraft, the Quincy Institute's outlet — Quincy argues for American military restraint — read the strike as part of an Israeli effort to push back Turkish influence in Syria.
The Iran war the papers cannot put down#
Washington's Iran coverage has turned inward, and the Palestinian relevance is in what it says about American appetite for another regional commitment.
The Atlantic reported the vice-president pitching a new objective for the war as the president disagrees with him, with military leaders and with long-standing allies. The Washington Post counted sixty days since the June interim deal with the talks at a standstill. The New York Times reported the president attacking Oman, the ally mediating for him, and separately that two ships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz.
The Intercept published two pieces of accountability reporting from the same war: the twenty-day-old grandchild killed in Iran, and internal emails indicating that American immigration agents cooperated with an Iranian request over deportation flights while the administration was planning the war.
One think-tank argument worth naming#
FDD — the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington institute closely aligned with Israeli security thinking — published a piece arguing that today's "Israel lobby" talking point originated as a Soviet influence operation.
The argument is the institute's, and it is aimed squarely at the debate now running in American politics over Israel's weight in United States policy — the debate Joe Kent reopened when he resigned over the Iran war. Palestinian readers should know the counter-campaign is organised, funded and being written down.
