Reuters, The Times and The Guardian are reporting on Liz Truss’s comments while meeting Yair Lapid that she wishes to review the location of the British Embassy in Tel Aviv, considering instead a relocation to Jerusalem.

The BBC has reported that Veteran CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour cancelled an interview with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi after he demanded she wear a headscarf for their meeting in New York. Amanpour pointed out that no previous presidents had requested this when she interviewed them outside Iran. She says a Raisi aide told her it was because of “the situation in Iran”.

The BBC has published an article discussing alleged abuse of young Jewish men within the Haredi community in Israel. The response by young haredi Jews – for whom talk of sex is taboo and reaching out to police is often not an option – is likened to the #MeToo movement.

The Guardian have a long read on the protests in Iran. The unrest erupted over the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini after her arrest by the morality police, who accused her of “inappropriate hijab”.  Her family have hotly contested official claims that she died from a heart attack due to underlying conditions.

Kan Radio reports on a stabbing attack last night in which eight people sustained light injuries which occurred at the Shilat junction near Modiin. A policeman shot and killed the assailant Mohammed Abu Juma, a 23-year-old resident of A-Tur in East Jerusalem, who tried to open the doors of two cars at the junction and stab the passengers while simultaneously spraying them with tear gas.
Maariv suggests that Prime Minister Liz Truss surprised Prime Minister Lapid saying that she would like to move the British embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. The paper reports that the two leaders met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. A spokesman for Truss told the prime minister that the United Kingdom is “considering the site of the British embassy in Israel.” Lapid is quoted saying, “I thank my good friend, British Prime Minister Liz Truss, who has announced she takes a positive view of moving the British embassy to Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. We will continue to strengthen the partnership between our two countries.”

Yediot Ahronot  includes an interview with Police Commissioner Insp. Gen. Kobi Shabtai: “It is my opinion that in such situations, social media should be blocked. This is war. Social media sends people into the streets. I am talking about closing it across the board. Shut it down, restore quiet, and when the situation is calm, let go. We are a democratic country, but there’s a limit. You do this for a limited time, with oversight of course, and stabilize the situation.” Shabtai was referring to a future scenario of violent riots like those that took place during Operation Guardian of the Walls last year, and when a preview of his comments were reported yesterday, they caused an uproar. The police chief said that at a cabinet meeting during Operation Guardian of the Walls he had proposed blocking social media in order to lower the flames in the streets. That did not happen, but Shabtai believes that this is something that can be done in the future. Responding to the interview, a  very high-ranking government official told the paper: “I am familiar with the material that so worries the police commissioner. We see the material that ISIS spreads to Arab Israelis, we saw what happened in the mixed cities. I am not in favour and Israel will not shut down social media, but I understand the police commissioner. However, you don’t close social media in democratic countries.” Other politicians were more vehement. “The position of the police commissioner is unacceptable and must be flatly rejected,” said Constitution, Law and Justice Committee Chairman MK Gilad Kariv. “It must be ensured that the Israel Police and the law enforcement establishment have the necessary tools to cope with violent events on a large scale. But the use of measures that are typical of undemocratic regimes is not an option.” MK Mossi Raz (Meretz) wrote a post on Twitter that was shared by Meretz Chairwoman Zehava Galon: “The police commissioner’s statement on shutting down social media during a clash is severe. Closing social media will undermine our national fortitude, which is based on democracy and freedom of speech. The public security minister must make it clear that what [Shabtai] said does not represent his ministry and the Israel Police.” Right-wing figures also fiercely criticized Shabtai. “The police commissioner’s statement is severe, outrageous and undemocratic, but it is not Shabtai’s real problem,” said Religious Zionist Party Chairman Bezalel Smotrich. “There is no chance that anyone here will let this baseless idea happen. This is just a symptom of a deeply rooted problem. Those who are unable to call it by its name and to define the Arabs’ war against us as terrorism, and who see their job and the job of the police as ‘separating between the extremists on both sides,’ cannot prepare the police for the next riots.”

In Yediot Ahronot, Ari Shavit argues that at this stage in the election campaign, neither Netanyahu, Lapid nor Gantz are telling the public the truth because the craziness of the Israeli tribal war makes it impossible for them to be honest.  He writes, “This is the truth that Netanyahu cannot say: a 61-seat right-wing government will lead us to national disaster. It will entirely wipe out the historical legacy of one of the most skilled prime ministers that we have ever had…He will be hostage to Rabbi Edelstein, Ben Gvir and Dudi Amsalem…This is the truth that Lapid cannot say: an hermetic blocking majority of 61 seats of the anyone-but-Bibi camp will lead to national paralysis. It will also prevent one of Israel’s most gifted politicians from realizing his untapped potential, because even if he ostensibly wins, there is no way in the world that Lapid can form a government. There is no chance of a second government of change…This is the truth that Gantz cannot say: the chances of forming an anyone-but-Bibi government headed by the defence minister, which the Haredim and the defectors will give a majority to in the Knesset, are slim. The first reason is that Lapid will shoot down any course of action that will rob him of his seniority in the center-left bloc. The second reason is that the Haredim are unlikely to switch sides and prefer an unknown adventure with Gantz over the solid certainty of an alliance with Netanyahu. And the third reason is that the defectors will also hesitate before they jump the steady ship of the strong leader whom they hate for the ship of a nice and humane leader who heads a party that only one tenth of Israelis voted for.” Shavit adds that the three truths that the three candidates for prime minister are hiding from the public has turned the current election campaign into a masquerade ball, of the kind we haven’t seen for a long time.

Maariv publishes an interview with Maj. Gen. (res.) Amir Eshel who was the commander of the Israel Air Force when the effort to prevent Hezbollah from arming and preventing Iranian entrenchment in Syria began. “The decision to embark on the war-between-wars was significant, I believe, after understanding the changes, the opportunities and the threats. This was a strategic course of action meant to address Hezbollah’s very advanced weapons, and then, starting in 2016, to address Iran’s attempt to entrench itself militarily in Syria.” Eshel, today the director general of the Defence Ministry, also talked about the preparations made for a possible strike on Iran and about the actions of the prime minister at the time, Benjamin Netanyahu, whom he said had not provided budgets for the preparations. “I told Netanyahu, ‘Listen, Mr. Prime Minister, you constantly talk about this, but nothing is happening. It’s simply not happening. Listen, you know what we need and what you want regarding Iran. Why don’t you let this happen?’ It drove him crazy. And he didn’t give it a shekel…In 2015, the JCPOA was reached. Three years earlier, there was talk that if we attacked, we could delay the bomb by two years. The agreement, with all its problems, and it has a lot of problems, bought us many more years. More than a decade. Having said that, the reservation must be added that you can never really know what will happen if you attack, or the reverse.” Eshel also says that the decision to withdraw from the JCPOA was very bad. “Some people said this in real time. So did Eisenkot. Because there were some who hoped that any moment, Iran would collapse.”

In Haaretz, Amos Harel asks whether the west takes Putin’s nuclear threats too lightly. He quotes Prof. Dima Adamsky from Reichman University who thinks that the probability of Putin using nuclear weapons is still low. But Adamsky is concerned by what he calls ‘a strategic destabilization of the Russian nuclear system. Adamsky told Haaretz that he doesn’t want to be seen as an alarmist, but he thinks that many in the West are taking too lightly the Russian president’s repeated threats to use nuclear weapons in the war. “Putin reemphasized that the nuclear option is a possible lever in the war,” he noted. “He said explicitly: I am not bluffing, don’t try me. In the escalating scale of declarations, he can hardly climb another rung.” Adamsky discerns a dangerous combination of Russian moves: “an accelerated referendum about annexing territories captured by Russia, a callup of reserves, and a nuclear threat – and all of them against the backdrop of the Ukrainian counteroffensive that scored surprising success in the east, while inside Russia the protest against continuing the war is increasing.”