On May 21, 2026, the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program (JKISP) at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law hosted Ambassador Daniel Shapiro for the latest installment of its Israel Insights webinar series. Ambassador Shapiro, a distinguished fellow with the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative and former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, joined Amichai Magen, Director of JKISP, and Or Rabinowitz, Visiting Fellow in Israel Studies. Ambassador Shapiro described the Trump administration as caught between three unappealing options on Iran's nuclear program: an ongoing stalemate over the closed Strait of Hormuz, military escalation that risks a global economic crisis, or a far weaker nuclear deal than Trump has demanded. He discussed similar issues of refusal to disarm obstructing negotiations in Lebanon, where Hezbollah's refusal to disarm blocks normalization despite new talks among ambassadors in Washington, and Gaza, where Hamas's refusal to disarm has stalled the transition to non-Hamas governance.

On U.S.-Israel relations, Ambassador Shapiro said Israel's standing in American public opinion is the lowest he recalls, primarily due to the toll of the Gaza war, but also due to the rightward drift of Netanyahu's coalition and Netanyahu's history of partisan relationships within U.S. politics. He outlined the difference between legitimate debate over the terms of U.S.-Israel security assistance and arguments that question Israel's existence as a state. Looking ahead to Israel's elections, expected between September and October, Ambassador Shapiro argued that rather than a pro- versus anti-Netanyahu split affecting the outcome, votes will be affected by public opinion on whether the government succeeded against Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran; Israel's eroded international standing; and the ultra-Orthodox exemption from military service. Asked to close with his thoughts on Israeli-Saudi normalization, Ambassador Shapiro, drawing on his direct involvement in pre-October 7th talks and a return trip to Saudi Arabia in December, explained how the widening Saudi-UAE regional rift and the unresolved Iran war further complicate Riyadh's existing conditions for a deal.

On April 16, 2026, the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program (JKISP) at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law hosted political theorist Tomer Persico for the 20th installment of its Israel Insights webinar series. Persico, a Research Fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute and Senior Research Scholar at UC Berkeley's Center for Middle Eastern Studies, joined Amichai Magen, Director of JKISP,  and Or Rabinowitz, Visiting Fellow in Israel Studies, to trace liberalism's surprising roots in Zionism's founding — including the once-overlooked fact that Menachem Begin's Herut party, not the ruling socialist left, was Israel's most consistent liberal force in its early decades — through its 1990s peak and into its present crisis. Persico argued that liberalism's troubles stem not from failure but from success: having become "the only game in town" after the Soviet collapse, it lost the ideological competitors that once distracted from its core weakness, namely that liberalism is an arrangement rather than a story, and cannot tell people who they are or where they belong. That vacuum, he said, is now filled by populism on the right and identitarian politics on the left, and in Israel, by religious fundamentalism.

Pressed by Magen on whether liberalism can defend itself against illiberal threats — from autonomy's corrosion of community to AI's challenge to human-centered politics — Persico argued that liberalism must be paired with complementary sources of meaning, such as tradition, religion, and nationalism, rather than trying to supply its own story. Turning to Israel's coming elections, he criticized Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, calling them fundamentalists pursuing a theocratic "halachic state," and argued the Likud has shifted from a liberal to a populist party under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu since 2015. He said the liberal camp must reclaim patriotism and Judaism itself from the religious right, rather than cede both. "We can have authentic, real Judaism as secular people, or as liberal religious people," he said, warning that failing to do so risks producing "a Jewish Iran."

In a seminar hosted by the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Matthew Levitt, who directs the Washington Institute's Reinhard Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, discussed the Middle East's changing strategic landscape through the lens of the 2026 Iran conflict. While Israel and the United States have achieved significant tactical successes against Hezbollah and the Houthis, Levitt argued, the countries have struggled in progressing the victories to long-term resolutions. He said state actors alone do not drive the region's conflict, but rather that proxy networks and aggressive public relations narratives hinder efforts towards stability.

Levitt then discussed the larger geopolitical effects of the conflict, including the shrinking chances for traditional peace agreements and increasingly negative international views of Israel after the October 7 attacks. He suggested that real changes in Israel’s global position would need political shifts and more transparency at home, while also noting the deep domestic doubts about solutions like a two-state framework. The discussion included the role of outside powers — especially China — in influencing regional dynamics through economic ties to Iran. He also touched on the likelihood that U.S.-Israel relations will increasingly shift from direct aid to joint investments in technology and defense.

On March 11, 2026, the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program (JKISP) at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law hosted constitutional scholar Masua Sagiv for a discussion titled “Who Stands for Democracy? Understanding Israel’s Constitutional Crisis,” as part of its Israel Insights Webinar series. Moderated by Amichai Magen, Director of JKISP, the conversation explored how Israel’s ongoing war, political realignment, and institutional tensions are reshaping debates over the Israel's democratic future. During the webinar, a missile alert prompted Sagiv to leave the conversation; while awaiting her return, Magen noted the moment reflected the realities of daily life in Israel.

Sagiv argued that for the next Israeli elections, the key political question surrounds not which individual leaders prevail but rather the coalitions that emerge afterward. While Israeli politics has shifted rightward, especially on security issues since the Second Intifada and the October 7 attacks, she emphasized the range of future directions depending on whether parties align with far-right and ultra-Orthodox partners or form broader centrist coalitions. Although consensus exists across political camps regarding concerns over a constitutional crisis—including desires to clarify the balance of power among the judiciary, executive, and legislature—political mistrust repeatedly derails compromise proposals. Resolving the crisis, Sagiv argued, will require rebuilding trust across Israel’s ideological divides and establishing clearer constitutional “rules of [the] game” to stabilize the country’s democratic system.

On February 25, 2026, as part of the Israel Insights webinar series hosted by the Jan Koum Israel Studies Program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, former Mossad counterterrorism chief Oded Ailam—now a researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs—discussed the evolving dynamics of the Israel–Hamas conflict and its regional and global implications.

Ailam argued that although Hezbollah is currently weakened financially and constrained domestically in Lebanon, it may increasingly employ overseas attacks against Israeli, American, and Jewish targets to demonstrate loyalty to Iran. He said that Hamas's dependence on Iran, however, diminishes as Turkish and Qatari support for Hamas grows, forming a new axis of political, financial, and military backing. According to Ailam, Hamas is unlikely to relinquish its weapons or influence in Gaza and will instead work to retain control behind the scenes even under a potential technocratic governing structure, casting doubt on the viability of proposed diplomatic frameworks.

Finally, addressing concerns about global radicalization and dormant terrorist networks in Western countries, Ailam outlined how state-backed ideological and financial influence spreads extremism and argued for stronger Western responses and long-term deradicalization efforts.