A Senate panel charged with some of the most hot-button portions of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” unveiled its portion of the gargantuan package on Monday.

The Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over tax policy, Medicaid and a slew of other items baked into the House GOP’s version of the bill, released its text as Republicans sprint to finish work on the president’s bill ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline.

TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ CRACKS DOWN ON BIDEN’S STUDENT LOAN ‘SCHEME,’ TOP REPUBLICAN SAYS

The committee, chaired by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, walked a tightrope with the legislation, given the push and pull surrounding divisive cuts to Medicaid, an increase to the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap and other provisions in the House’s version of the bill.

Crapo lauded the bill in a statement and noted that it made the president’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent, slashed “Green New Deal” spending and targeted “waste, fraud and abuse in spending programs while preserving and protecting them for the most vulnerable.” 

“I look forward to continued coordination with our colleagues in the House and the Administration to deliver President Trump’s bold economic agenda for the American people as quickly as possible,” he said. 

While House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pleaded with Senate leaders to change the bill as little as possible after narrowly passing the bill in the House, particularly on the compromises he reached on SALT and Medicaid, the Senate has vowed to leave its imprint on the package. 

‘FULLY JUSTIFIED’: GRAHAM PLOWS AHEAD WITH TRUMP BORDER FUNDING DESPITE PAUL’S OBJECTIONS

Still, the Senate’s offering tweaked or outright changed some of the House’s provisions across the tax and health care policy landscape. 

One of the thorniest issues in the House was the SALT cap hike, and blue-state Republicans vowed to vote against the bill unless their demands for a sizable increase were met. 

The Senate’s offering drastically undercut the House GOP’s negotiated cap, instead permanently extending the current $10,000 deduction cap starting at the end of this year. However, tax writers view the modified cap change as more of a placeholder number while deliberations continue. 

But Republicans from New York and California have already come out in force against the proposed change and contended that lowering the cap at all was non-negotiable. 

“Instead of undermining the deal already in place and putting the entire bill at risk, the Senate should work with us to keep our promise of historic tax relief and deliver on our Republican agenda,” SALT Caucus co-chairs Reps. Young Kim, R-Calif., and Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., said in a joint statement to Fox News Digital.

BLUE STATE REPUBLICANS THREATEN REVOLT AGAINST TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ IF SENATE CHANGES KEY TAX RULE

Another stark departure in the Senate’s healthcare language is Medicaid. Despite a cohort of Republicans warning to avoid deeper cuts that could lead to people being booted from their healthcare or negative effects on rural hospitals, lawmakers on the panel appear to have further dug in on slashes to the program. 

For example, the Senate’s bill proposed halting an increase to the provider tax rate, or the amount that state Medicaid programs pay to healthcare providers on behalf of Medicaid beneficiaries, for non-Affordable Care Act expansion states, and lowering the rate in expansion states annually until it hits 3.5 percent. The House version just paused the increase.

The Senate’s offering also lowered the House’s proposed maximum Child Tax Credit from $2,500 to $2,200 while making the credit permanent. The House’s bill offered the increased credit until 2029, at which point it would revert to $2,000.

And on green energy tax credits, including those for electric vehicles, green energy upgrades to homes and others, the Senate offered more flexibility with their rollback timelines of Biden-era green energy subsidies ushered in by the Inflation Reduction Act.

The House version moved up the expiration date for many credits to the end of this year, while the Senate’s version tweaked the language in some places to allow for 90- and 180-day windows after the bill’s enactment. In some cases, the credits were given an entire year before they were slated to expire.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Notably, the committee’s legislation would also increase the debt limit to $5 trillion, a $1 trillion hike over the House’s offering. The inclusion of a debt limit hike has been a sore subject for Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has argued that he would prefer to vote on the debt limit separately. 

Part of the impetus to advance the Senate’s version of the “big, beautiful bill,” however, is to beat the debt guillotine hanging over lawmakers’ heads. The Treasury Department has forecast that Congress has until August to increase the debt limit. 

Fox News Digital’s Liz Elkind contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump has delivered a big win for America. The imminent linkage of Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel will benefit American workers, America’s steel industry, and America’s strategic alliance with Japan vis-a-vis China. Thanks to President Trump’s Executive Order clearing the path for this deal, America’s steel industry will have the investment and modernization needed to compete internationally in this highly strategic sector. 

As I’ve long argued, the prospect of Japan – a close American ally with a stable democracy and market economy – making a major investment in America should be welcomed. Adversaries like China are doing their best to undermine our economy and dominate critical industries. To prevail, we need to expand our manufacturing base in concert with nations that share our values and interests. 

Unlike President Biden – who put politics over delivering results that benefit the American people – President Trump rolled up his sleeves and got the job done. Back in January, the Biden administration blocked this deal from going through, citing “national security” concerns. But why would major investment by one of America’s closest allies pose a threat to the American people? In reality, this was a politicized decision designed to curry favor ahead of the 2024 election. 

TRUMP GREENLIGHTS U.S. STEEL DEAL, PROMISING $11B INVESTMENT AND 100,000 AMERICAN JOBS

President Trump saw through all this, as did the steelworkers who knew that, without significant new investment, their steel mills would soon close. This acquisition will bring a world-leader in steel technology and manufacturing expertise to American operations and enable U.S. Steel to make the upgrades it needs to thrive. Nippon has promised to commit $14 billion to modernizing steel mills to make these production centers more competitive. 

Without this investment, the company would have had no choice but to close these facilities and lay off thousands of workers. Instead, they are creating new jobs and ensuring that the mills will be able to operate for decades to come. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

This has the potential to unleash incredible new levels of American productivity. It’s thought that the deal will help Nippon-US Steel to move toward 100 million metric tons of global crude steel capacity and significantly increase its competitive edge in the international market. What’s more, allowing this deal to go forward also sends the right signals to Japanese and other international investors who may have been discouraged from direct investment in the U.S. 

As President Trump has made clear, this isn’t a foreign takeover – it’s a strategic partnership with American control and oversight. The administration has helped to secure a favorable agreement in which U.S. voices are represented and our interests are protected. While the details are still emerging, the terms that have been discussed publicly would guarantee the appointment of an American CEO, majority American board membership, and government approval on certain key areas of activity. 

As someone who spent years defending America’s interests on the world stage, I’ve seen firsthand how important – and mutually beneficial – our economic partnerships with allies like Japan are to keeping America prosperous and strong. A thriving steel industry powered by allied investment and American workers makes us stronger; a shuttered steel industry makes us vulnerable.

This is what “America First” looks like in practice – smart partnerships that benefit American workers while strengthening our alliances and our economy. 

It’s a win for America, and America has President Trump to thank for making it happen.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM MIKE POMPEO
 

HBO host Bill Maher accused actor Sean Penn of being a hypocrite this week after the actor slammed the comedian’s meeting with President Donald Trump.

During the latest episode of Maher’s “Club Random” podcast, the comedian and political commentator called out Penn’s meetings with world dictators when the actor pointed out that he wouldn’t have gone to dinner with Trump like Maher had.

“Really, you meet with f—ing Castro and Hugo Chavez, but not the President of the United States?” Maher asked. 

The disagreement came while the two discussed Maher’s meeting with the president at the White House in April. Maher has maintained that the meeting with Trump was “gracious and measured” and suggested the president was a different man in private than he appears on camera.

BILL MAHER DECLARES HIMSELF A ‘HERO’ FOR CONFRONTING TRUMP AT WHITE HOUSE MEETING

Penn met with late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez in Caracas in 2007. According to Chavez at the time, he and the actor discussed “why the (U.S.) empire attacks Chavez so much.”

The actor also met with late Cuban communist dictator Fidel Castro years prior, as well as Raul Castro in 2008.

Maher began by asking Penn whether he believed having dinner with Trump was the right move. The actor said he could see the reasons why Maher would go to dinner with Trump, but admitted he wished the dinner was perceived as “less successful” for the president than it was, or that Maher had less praise for Trump’s demeanor during their evening together.

Maher disputed that point, stating, “Well, it was less successful because I never stopped saying all the things I’ve always said about him. It would have been successful if he had somehow seduced me into supporting him. So it wasn’t successful.”

CARVILLE RIPS ‘SUPREMELY NAIVE’ BILL MAHER FOR MEETING TRUMP AND PRAISING HIS HOSPITALITY

“The only reason I would not accept an invitation is because I see, I see no – it’s a long flight,” Penn said, struggling to give his answer.

Maher cut him off mid-thought, bringing up his meetings with the Latin American dictators. 

Penn defended himself, saying there were good things that came out of those meetings.

“Yeah, I saw good results come out of some of those things in terms of the agendas that I had… I just personally wouldn’t trust anything that was said in the room, including the personality,” he added, appearing to suggest taking Trump at face value was beyond the pale.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST MEDIA AND CULTURE NEWS

Maher shot back, “It’s not a matter of trusting it. It’s a matter of seeing it, a matter of experiencing it, a matter of knowing it. It’s like saying, ‘I don’t want this medical test because, you know, I don’t want to know.’ I want to know.”

“Fair enough,” Penn replied.

Ten years ago Monday, businessman Donald J. Trump launched his first presidential campaign, marking the beginning of the “Make America Great Again” movement. 

Trump, beside his wife, Melania, famously came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue in New York City June 16, 2015, to announce his intention to run for president of the United States. 

FOX NEWS PROJECTS DONALD TRUMP DEFEATS KAMALA HARRIS TO BECOME 47TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

“I am officially running for President of the United States,” Trump posted to his then-Twitter account June 16, 2015, along with a photo of his family after his announcement. “#MakeAmericaGreatAgain.”

“Ten Years Ago Today, President Donald J. Trump came down the Golden Escalator and officially declared his candidacy for President of the United States,” Team Trump posted to Instagram Monday to commemorate the ten-year anniversary. 

10 YEARS LATER: HOW THE MEDIA COVERED TRUMP’S ENTRY INTO THE 2016 RACE FOREVER CHANGING AMERICAN POLITICS

Since, Trump has changed American politics — creating the MAGA movement and serving as the 45th and 47th president of the United States, after beating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016 and former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2020. 

Trump is the only president to serve two nonconsecutive terms other than Grover Cleveland who was elected in 1884 and again in 1892.  

“This will truly be the golden age of America,” Trump said, upon winning the 2024 election in a landslide. 

Welcome to the Fox News Politics newsletter, with the latest updates on the Trump administration, Capitol Hill and more Fox News politics content. Here’s what’s happening…

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s attempt to mock President Donald Trump’s military parade honoring the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army backfired on social media as conservatives and other critics lambasted her for allegedly holding “utter contempt” for the U.S. military, while others slammed her for spending the weekend in the Hamptons attending her former longtime aide’s wedding while criticizing Trump.  

“This witch was a few votes away from becoming commander in chief. This is what she thinks of our military. Man, @BuzzPatterson was right. Hillary hates the troops,” conservative X commentator Benny Johnson posted in response to Clinton’s post Sunday. 

Clinton posted compare-and-contrast photos of Trump’s military parade that was held on Washington’s Constitution Ave. Saturday evening. Protesters nationwide held “No Kings Day” demonstrations in response to Trump’s parade, and to denounce the Trump administration’s ongoing deportation raids in left-wing cities… READ MORE.

‘THE ONLY WAY’: Obama seems to swipe at Trump immigration crackdown, saying migrants ‘treated as enemies’

RHETORIC UNDER FIRE: Republicans criticize Dem congressional candidate’s ’86 47′ post as call for ‘political violence’

CAMPUS CRACKDOWN: Harvard urges US judge to block Trump’s effort to ban international students

JETTING TO CANADA: Trump heads to Canada for first G7 conference, continues focus on Israel as 22nd week back in office kicks off

MIDDLE EAST BACKDROP: G7 summit opens in Canada, with leaders to address trade, wars while hoping to avoid clash with Trump

THAT’S ENOUGH: Carney cuts short questions to Trump ahead of G7 summit

G7 GRIEVANCES: Trump slams Obama, Trudeau for pushing Russia out of G8 summit years ago: ‘Wouldn’t have a war’

‘EXPANDING QUIVER’: Israel activates ‘Barak Magen’ aerial defenses for system’s first ever interception

BATTLE READY FLEET: USS Nimitz carrier strike group sailing toward Middle East ahead of schedule, US official says

BIBLICAL BOND: Evangelical leaders praise Trump’s continued support for Israel amid war with Iran

AIR CONTROL: Israel says it has aerial superiority over Tehran, Iranian intelligence leader killed

ON THE BRINK: Momentum for regime change in Iran surges amid Israel’s conflict with Tehran

WAR BY DEGREES: Senate returns amid concerns about deeper US involvement in the Iran, Israel conflict

FAITH ON TRIAL: Supreme Court will hear pro-life center’s First Amendment fight against New Jersey

‘BE PROACTIVE’: Minnesota lawmaker shootings prompt security debate in House and Senate

DESIGNED TO DEMONIZE: DHS slams the idea that authorities target people based on skin color: ‘Disgusting and categorically FALSE’

NARROW MARGINS: How Johnson pulled off another impossible win with just 1-vote margin on $9.4B spending cut bill

‘OUT OF STEP’: Randi Weingarten, Lee Saunders quit DNC in latest blow to Dem Party leadership

BATTLE FOR FAIR PLAY: Lawmaker unveils Riley Gaines-backed bill targeting transgender military academy students

CASH CUT: New GOP bill would cut off housing funds to sanctuary cities defying Trump DHS

SUPERFUND UNDER FIRE: AG leading suit against NY effort to punish energy firms for climate change warns of major repercussions

FAITH BETRAYED: New ‘Gavin Newsom files’ reveal California governor’s ‘extreme’ agenda: report

Get the latest updates on the Trump administration and Congress, exclusive interviews and more on FoxNews.com.

“The View” co-host Ana Navarro detailed her experience at the “No Kings” protest demonstrations over the weekend, telling her co-hosts that there were “instigators” planted in the crowd. 

“I was so proud of everybody that protested because I saw people who were put in the crowd to instigate confrontation and folks were in with it, and they did not engage,” Navarro said during the show on Monday. “People were saying to each other, ‘do not engage.’”

The “No Kings” protests took shape over the weekend across the country to counter President Donald Trump and his policies as he was present at the military parade honoring the 250th birthday of the U.S. Army.

“I have to tell you, it was so uplifting, because so often we ask each other, ‘but what can we do as one person?’ And just getting off the couch, getting off Twitter, and going and doing something and being in community, because I think a lot of us have felt fear and loneliness in the last five months, and to see this happening all over America. I saw veterans, I saw old people, I saw young people, I saw Blacks and Whites and Latinos. I saw so many people that weren’t Latinos or immigrants holding up signs for the dignity of the immigrant community,” Navarro said.

GOVERNORS WARN ANTI-TRUMP ‘NO KINGS’ PROTESTERS AGAINST BECOMING VIOLENT: ‘YOU’RE GOING TO GET ARRESTED’

Navarro attended the protests in Miami, Florida, her hometown, and posted on Instagram over the weekend to thank everyone who participated in the demonstrations. 

“Thank you to the millions of people who participated in the thousands of events in big and small cities all over America. It has been a particularly heart-breaking week for the Latino and immigrant community. Thank you to the allies. Thank you to everyone who is resisting and helping in so many ways. Together we are stronger,” Navarro wrote on Instagram. 

The other co-hosts of “The View” also praised the protests.

“Men were out for women, women were out for men, Latinos were out for Black folks, Asian folks were out, we were all out looking out for each other, because if I don’t look out for you, what am I doing?” Goldberg said. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

Goldberg also warned of “bad players” at protests.

“Be aware that there are bad players out there when you are protesting. When you see them starting to go, you let everybody else know what you know, not them. Because they are not there for the same reasons we are here,” she said.

‘CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Brad Pitt is ready for a rematch.

During a recent interview with Extra, the 61-year-old actor shared that he and actor Tom Cruise used to race against each other in go-karts when working together in the ’90s.

“Tom and I gotta get back out there. The last time we went there, he pit me,” he said. “He took me on the last corner and I’m still bitter about it 30 years later. Nah, he had my number.”

The two famously worked together on the 1994 film, “Interview with a Vampire.” When asked if he has any plans to work with Cruise again, Pitt jokingly shared that he’ll “consider it” if he doesn’t “have to hang from biplanes and, like, swim through submarines.”

BRAD PITT TALKS MISTAKES, SHARES ‘SIMPLE EQUATION’ HE LIVES BY

Cruise is known for doing his own stunts when making his films, most recently hanging off a biplane and then jumping onto another biplane, all while in midair, in his latest film, “Mission: Impossible – Final Reckoning.”

While Pitt said he didn’t want to participate in any crazy stunts, he did drive at dangerously fast speeds when filming his upcoming movie, “F1: The Movie.”

“It was such a pleasure to get in those cars. It was such a high. It was like nothing I’ve ever experienced before. I’ve gotta figure out a way to do it again,” he explained. “So the lines are secondary. You’re worried about your braking points, the lines, not so much.” 

In “F1: The Movie,” Pitt portrays an up-and-coming Formula 1 race car driver in the 1990s whose career comes to a halt after an accident on the track. Thirty years later, he is brought back to the racing world with a chance at redemption.

Much of what is seen on camera was filmed at real-life Formula 1 racing events, with Pitt sharing “we’ve embedded ourselves into the racing schedule, into the actual sporting event.”

“And so we would have, like, five minutes, we’d be on the grid, the race is gonna start in 10, and we would have these two takes to do a scene on the grid with all the great production value of the real race drivers and the real cars in front of us,” Pitt said. “It was just great energy, the whole thing.”

During an interview with GQ in May, Pitt reflected on his life in the public eye, telling the outlet, “some version of my personal life” has been in the news for 30 years.

“It’s been an annoyance I’ve had to always deal with in different degrees, large and small, as I do the things I really want to do. So, it’s always been this kind of nagging time suck or waste of time, if you let it be that. Mostly I feel pretty…. My life is fairly contained. It feels pretty warm and secure with my friends, with my loves, with my fam, with my knowledge of who I am, that, you know, it’s like this fly buzzing around a little bit,” he said.

He later elaborated on his comments when speaking with Entertainment Tonight in June, saying the older he gets, the more he realizes the importance of surrounding “yourself with the people you know, the people you love, the people that love you back.”

“F1: The Movie” is set to premiere on June 27.

President Donald Trump is urging Iran to return to talks with the U.S. over the Islamic State’s nuclear program “before it’s too late.”

The president, making his comments on day four of the missile strikes and aerial attacks between Iran and Israel that were triggered by Israel’s initial attack which killed top members of Iran’s military.

“They should talk, and they should talk immediately,” Trump told reporters on Monday in Canada, where he was attending an annual meeting of top western leaders.

The daily bombardments between the two countries, which have led to rising death tolls in each nation, have dominated global headlines and sparked concerns of an even wider war in the Middle East.

CLICK HERE FOR LIVE FOX NEWS UPDATES IN THE ISRAEL-IRAN ATTACKS

And back in the U.S., the attacks have exacerbated already existing divisions within both the Democratic and Republican parties.

Democrats, who have grappled with internal splits for a couple of years over Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza, spoke with two voices in the hours after Israel’s initial attack on Iran and Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu’s aggressive military strategy.

ISRAEL AIRSTRIKE HITS IRANIAN STATE TV BUILDING

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, said soon after the first attacks that “I have long said that Israel has a right to defend itself and that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

And Sen. Jackie Rosen of Nevada, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that “Israel acted in self-defense against an attack from Iran, and the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.”

But Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the powerful panel, warned that “Israel’s alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence.”

And Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington State, a former head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that “Netanyahu must not be allowed to pull America into another forever war. Instead, we must immediately push for negotiated de-escalation.”

But it’s not just Democrats divided over the bloodshed in the Middle East.

Trump, hours before the initial Israeli attacks, said: “I don’t want them going in, because I think it would blow it,” as he referred to U.S. negotiations with Tehran over Iran’s nuclear program.

ISRAELI LEADER SAYS TRUMP WAS MARKED FOR DEATH BY IRANIANS

And Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Marco Rubio, in his initial statement, made clear that the U.S. had not assisted Israel and omitted any mention of support for Israel’s attack.

But while Trump continued to push for negotiations – saying on social media Sunday that “Iran and Israel should make a deal” – he has also made clear U.S. support for Israel and has increasingly warned Tehran that “if we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the U.S. Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before.”

The top two Republicans in Congress were quick to back Israel.

“For too long, the mullahs in Iran have publicly aspired to wipe the only democracy in the Middle East off the face of the map via any means possible,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., highlighted on social media immediately after the initial attack that “Israel IS right — and has a right — to defend itself!”

And one of the most vocal GOP hawks – Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina – wrote “Game on” and praised Israel.

“Hats off to Israel for one of the most impressive military strikes and covert operations in Israeli history.”

But the military hawks have lost much of their clout in the GOP, thanks to the rise of Trump’s America First movement over the past decade, which pushes for extremely limited U.S. military involvement overseas.

“Anyone slobbering for the U.S. to become fully involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/MAGA. Wishing for murder of innocent people is disgusting. We are sick and tired of foreign wars. All of them,” Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, a top Trump ally in the House, wrote on social media on Sunday.

And conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson took aim at what he called “warmongers” as he urged the U.S. to avoid any military involvement in the Israel-Iran war.

Matthew Bartlett, a Republican strategist who served at the State Department during Trump’s first term, noted that “Donald Trump changed the direction of the Republican Party” when it comes to American military engagements around the world. 

“That gave him a new coalition and new political power. This new war in the Middle East is certainly threatening that coalition. While we are not yet involved in a war, chances of escalation are dramatically increased and that certainly has ramifications with the MAGA coalition,” Bartlett warned.

Stoking fears among some in MAGA world were Trump’s comments to ABC News on Sunday that “it’s possible we could get involved.”

Wayne Lesperance, a veteran political scientist and president of New England College, highlighted that “the divide in the GOP can be traced to Trump’s promises to pull America back from its entanglements in the world.”

But Lesperance noted that “the GOP has a long history of support for Israel and animosity towards Iran.  So, addressing the current conflict between Israel and Iran represents a major decision point for the party’s future outlook on foreign policy.”

On 13 June, Israel launched a series of coordinated airstrikes on multiple Iranian nuclear facilities and military installations. Reports indicate that the operation also involved the targeted assassination of nuclear scientists and senior Iranian military officials. According to preliminary figures, the attacks killed about 70 Iranians and injured more than 320.

In swift retaliation, Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei condemned the strikes as a criminal act, stating that Israel had “opened its dirty and bloody hand to a crime” by deliberately targeting civilian areas. He warned, “The powerful hand of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic will not let Israel go unpunished.” Iranian military spokesperson Abolfazl Shekarchi echoed the threat, warning that Israel would pay a “heavy price” for its actions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the operation as a strategic effort to degrade Iran’s nuclear programme and its ballistic missile production. Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir described the strikes as a turning point, claiming that Israel had reached a “point of no return” in a “fight to preserve our existence”. 

But this narrative has drawn sharp criticism. Increasingly, Israel’s invocation of a “right to exist” is viewed as a hollow justification. Critics argue that Israel’s portrayal of itself as a perpetual victim serves to deflect accountability, even as it continues to occupy and destabilise the Middle East. If Israel feels threatened, it is a consequence of its own sustained aggression and regional occupation.

Israel’s assault on Iran cannot be divorced from Tehran’s longstanding support for the Palestinian cause. As a central pillar of the “Axis of Resistance” — a regional alliance that includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria, various Iraqi militias and the Yemeni Houthis — Iran has consistently backed armed and political groups resisting Israeli occupation and Western influence. This support, especially its material and strategic assistance to Palestinian factions in Gaza and the West Bank, has long made Iran a target of Israeli hostility.

Analysts suggest that the June 2025 strikes were not merely pre-emptive attacks on nuclear infrastructure, but also punitive measures intended to weaken Iran’s capacity to support Palestinian resistance. Israel’s actions signal an attempt to fracture the regional coalition that has coalesced around opposition to Zionist expansionism and US hegemony in the Middle East. In this context, the offensive appears not as an isolated act of self-defence, but as a broader geopolitical move to dismantle the Axis of Resistance and deter solidarity with Palestine.

Despite its declared military objectives, Israel’s airstrikes caused significant damage to residential areas and civilian infrastructure in Tehran, raising serious concerns under international humanitarian law. These actions violate the principle of distinction, which prohibits attacks on civilians and civilian objects; the principle of proportionality, which forbids excessive civilian harm relative to anticipated military advantage; and the obligation to take precautions in attack to minimise civilian casualties. Civilian infrastructure is protected under Article 52 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. 

Moreover, Israel has not demonstrated lawful self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter, meaning the operation constitutes an unlawful use of force. These violations amount to war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which prohibits the deliberate targeting of civilians and disproportionate attacks.

The Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran confirmed that radioactive contamination caused by the attack on the Natanz uranium enrichment facility was successfully contained and reported no casualties at the site. Nonetheless, the targeting of nuclear sites poses grave humanitarian and environmental risks, including potential radiation leaks and contamination with effects that can last for centuries.

Confirmed targets of the Israeli operation included:

• Tehran, including nearby military facilities;
• Natanz, where the main uranium enrichment facility was hit;
• Tabriz, near a nuclear research centre and two military bases;
• Isfahan, located south of the capital;
• Arak, in southwestern Iran; and
• Kermanshah, near the Iraqi border, where an underground ballistic missile depot was struck.

Following the attacks, Israel’s military issued a warning: “Anyone who tries to challenge us will pay a heavy price.” This statement reinforces Israel’s image as a belligerent state that disregards core principles of international law, including those recently affirmed by the International Court of Justice.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has confirmed that the Natanz site was hit, and its director, Rafael Grossi, stated that the UN is monitoring radiation levels and is in contact with Iranian authorities and on-site inspectors. But the IAEA has yet to acknowledge Iran’s official nuclear policy, which emphasizes peaceful nuclear technology, a nuclear weapons-free Middle East, and adherence to Khamenei’s fatwa banning nuclear weapons.

This transparent stance stands in stark contrast to Israel’s ambiguous and undisclosed nuclear arsenal. In 2023, former Israeli minister Amichai Eliyahu openly suggested that using nuclear weapons against Gaza was “an option,” later adding that Gaza had “no right to exist” and threatening all those supporting Hamas or Palestine. Although Eliyahu was indefinitely suspended from the government, his remarks strongly imply that Israel not only possesses nuclear weapons, but also entertains their potential use.

These developments raise urgent questions about the absence of international nuclear inspectors in Israel, and the inadequate response from the IAEA and the UN Security Council. As Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian stated: “The UN Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency must take immediate and uninterrupted action to disarm this barbaric and apartheid regime.”

The international response to Israel’s assault has once again exposed the deep double standards of Western powers. While Western governments have swiftly condemned similar or lesser actions by other states — often invoking human rights, international law, and the UN Charter — they remain largely silent or issue only tepid statements when it comes to Israel. The same actors that vocally denounce aggression elsewhere have repeatedly shielded Israel from accountability, even in the face of clear violations of international humanitarian law. 

This selective outrage not only undermines the credibility of international legal norms but also emboldens Israel to act with impunity. The disparity in response highlights a geopolitical bias where the rules-based international order is applied unequally and used as a weapon against adversaries, but disregarded when violations are committed by allies or strategic partners. 

In failing to hold Israel accountable, the international community risks legitimising the suppression of resistance movements and entrenching cycles of impunity and occupation across the region.

Sõzarn Barday is a writer and attorney based in South Africa and has a particular interest in human rights in the Middle East. Opinions shared represent her individual perspective.

The African Union estimates that about 60% of Africa’s population will live in urban areas by 2030. This highlights the importance of urban spaces in the governance discourse. One of the unique elements of Africa’s urbanisation is that, demographically, the cities are very young. 

For example, in South Africa, youth (defined as ages 15 to 35) make up just over 34% of the population. Of this percentage, the National Youth Development Agency estimates that roughly 63.4% live in urban areas, specifically in Gauteng and the Western Cape. 

Despite young people making up a significant demographic in cities, youth are often excluded from policy and decision-making processes. Furthermore they are more vulnerable to some of the most acute problems that have come with urbanisation such as unemployment, poverty and violence. For instance, according to the most recent Labour Force Survey (Q4 2024) 44.6% of young people are unemployed in South Africa; this translates to roughly 4.7  million people. 

As 16 June, South Africa’s national youth day, approaches, we should reflect on how we can do better for young people and, more specifically, how our cities can be (re)designed to address some of the key challenges that young people face.

Urban planning is important for how cities function and develop over time. This in turn has an effect on other governance focuses from access to and quality of service delivery, quality of life and addressing socio-economic issues. But cities do not exist in a vacuum and thus decisions that were taken in the past continue to shape the present and future. 

Specifically in the context of South Africa, cities were intentionally designed to segregate and control, and undermine people’s dignity. This meant that for post-apartheid local governments, the challenge was not only to deliver services to informal settlements but also try to redress the unjust legacies of the racist policies that were ingrained into the very fabric of South African cities. 

One of the most difficult issues since 1994, for instance, was how to incorporate townships and informal settlements into the formal functions of the city, not just from a service delivery point of view but also from a developmental one. Consider Cape Town. Forced removals, prohibitively high property prices and ineffective transport (and other) policies have pushed many to live in settlements all around the city. This has further reinforced the spatial dislocation wrought by apartheid which makes searching for work, and transport to work, exceedingly expensive. 

A 2022 YouthCapital report on the cost of looking for work highlighted how the spatial layout of cities has worked against young job-seekers. The report shows that young people spend more than R900 a month to look for work, with a large percentage of this going towards transport and data costs. Despite many frameworks and policies being proposed to address the issue of youth unemployment, there has not been sufficient discussion around removing spatial barriers that put financial strain on job-seekers, further entrenching inequality and poverty. 

Urban planning and spatial design can directly address some of these issues by designing and implementing policies that are centred on empowerment, supporting and improving information and communication technology to reduce the need to travel, and to cut travel costs through better designed public transport infrastructure.

Outside of looking for jobs, the spatial design and layout of a city can also be used to promote the development of small businesses and entrepreneurship. This is particularly relevant in the South African context as the informal economy accounted for 19.5% of the total employment in the fourth quarter of 2024. This makes it the second-largest job creation sector in the country. But the informal sector is often overlooked in policy discussions, with local governments either working to remove these spaces, such as the continued fining and removal of street traders, or ignoring them completely. 

This sector is a key opportunity for local governments to support and facilitate youth entrepreneurship. One way to do this is through better connecting these markets to the wider city, through designated market spaces for entrepreneurs and customers, improving public safety and improving access to basic services to make it easier for people to do business. 

In light of this, not only is urban planning important for youth in job creation but also for enhancing youth entrepreneurship.

Last, urban and spatial design is important for improving and supporting people’s quality of life and overall wellbeing. Often with urban development, the focus is on ways to maximise economic output, but cities and people are more than just their economic value or output. Cities are made up of communities, families and support structures that create and replicate social values and interactions. 

As a result, centring youth in cities will allow them to not only realise their potential but also encourage them to create, build community and have fun.

But the urban experience is often marred by a complex set of issues that intersect across social, economic and historical lines. This has made cities increasingly unfriendly towards young people, especially for the most marginalised. 

Therefore, there needs to be a greater emphasis on making cities more inclusive and community orientated. 

Scholarship on urbanisation has become increasingly focused on this idea of inclusive development. It expands the idea of development beyond the traditional economic or political issues, exploring how cities can be moregreen, community orientated and equitable. In the South African context, many NGOs and communities are creating spaces such as dance groups and art and crafts centres, helping people not only to explore and create but also create community. 

Community is important especially when looking to make cities more friendly, because it creates a sense of belonging and support, which can help young people stand against destructive activities such as gangsterism. 

While these are just a few ways of centring youth in the conversation about urban planning and development, it highlights a crucial need for more inclusiveness in urban policy. Over the past two decades, a number of urban policies and frameworks have been introduced and revised, but there seems to be a misalignment about who these policies are for. 

Perhaps it’s time to rethink who we want to build cities for and what we want our cities to be.

Stuart Morrison is a data analyst in the Governance Insights and Analytics team at Good Governance Africa.