Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Ticker Views

What charges does Benjamin Netanyahu face, and what’s at stake if he is granted a pardon?

Published

on

Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, La Trobe University

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has requested a pardon in his long-running corruption trial – a move that has set off alarm bells among his critics that he’s trying to circumvent the rule of law.

In a video message, Netanyahu says Israel’s current “security and political” situation makes it impossible for him to appear in court several times a week.

His request for a pardon from Israel’s president is just the latest twist in a case that has dragged on for years. It could have significant implications for Israel’s legal system – and Netanyahu’s political future, with elections due next year.

What charges does he face?

Netanyahu is indisputably the most important political figure of modern Israeli politics. He was first elected prime minister in 1996 and is now in his sixth term.

He has been indicted on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust, related to investigations that date back to 2016. There are three cases now known by numbers – Case 1,000, Case 2,000 and Case 4,000. The trial began in 2020.

In Case 1,000, Netanyahu is alleged to have received some US$200,000 (A$305,000) worth of gifts, including cigars and champagne, from Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan and Australian billionaire James Packer.

Case 2,000 is related to alleged meetings Netanyahu had with Arnon Mozes, the publisher of the prominent Yediot Ahronot newspaper. Prosecutors say Mozes offered Netanyahu favourable coverage in exchange for restrictions being imposed on one of his rival newspapers.

And the final case, Case 4,000 is related to a communications conglomerate, Bezeq. The attorney-general alleges another reciprocal agreement: Netanyahu would be portrayed positively on the online platform, it’s alleged, in exchange for him supporting regulatory changes that would benefit Bezeq’s controlling shareholder.

Netanyahu has consistently denied any wrongdoing in the cases, saying he’s a victim of a “witch hunt”. In 2021, he characterised the charges as “fabricated and ludicorous”. When he took the stand in 2024, he said:

These investigations were born of sin. There was no offence, so they found an offence.

Experts have pointed out that a pardon can only be given once someone’s been convicted of a crime. But Netanyahu is not offering to admit any responsibility or guilt in the case, and he likely never will. He’s simply asking for a pardon, so that he can get on with his job.

Independence of Israel’s judicial system

Since the trial began in 2020, many witnesses have testified in the case, including some former Netanyahu aides who entered into plea bargains and became state witnesses. So, there’s been some pretty damning material brought against Netanyahu.

But he’s been extremely savvy and politically intelligent to use other issues – particularly the Gaza war – at every opportunity to try to postpone or interrupt the proceedings.

And after the Hamas attacks of October 2023, the number of trial days was limited because of security. According to media reports, Netanyahu has frequently requested his hearings be cancelled due to his handling of the war.

Netanyahu’s supporters don’t seem to have a problem with his request for a pardon, but it is shining a light on broader questions around the independence of the Israeli legal system.

In early 2023, the Netanyahu government put forth plans to overhaul the judicial system, which critics said would weaken the Supreme Court and Israel’s system of checks and balances. Netanyahu wasn’t involved in the effort because the attorney-general said it would be a conflict of interest due to his corruption trial, but other ministers in his cabinet were pushing it.

Massive protests happened on a regular basis throughout Israel in response to this move. Critics saw this as a frontal attack on the basic foundations of the Israeli legal system.

The request for a pardon is now part of this wider story, even though the two issues are not formally linked. Netanyahu’s opponents say it’s yet another indication of him and his coalition having a fundamentally different conception of the rule of law.

Netanyahu’s political survival

This is all about Netanyahu’s personal and political survival. He was re-elected leader of the Likud Party this month and he has declared his intention to run again for prime minister in next year’s elections – and that he expects to win.

The Israeli Basic Law suggests Netanyahu couldn’t run if he’s been convicted of a serious offence, though it’s not clear if he would actually be blocked at this point.

Media reports have suggested Netanyahu wants to move up the elections from November to June in the hopes he’ll be able to secure deals to normalise relations with both Saudi Arabia and Indonesia by then. This fits a pattern of him trying to use foreign policy gains to offset his domestic problems.

With elections coming, he’s now trying every possible manoeuvre to improve his position – and the pardon is just one of them. It’s likely the only option he has now to make the case go away because the trial has gone on for so long and at some point the court will have to make a decision.The Conversation

Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, Professor of International Law, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ticker Views

Lunar Gateway faces delays and funding debate amid Artemis ambitions

Published

on

What’s the point of a space station around the Moon?

Berna Akcali Gur, Queen Mary University of London

The Lunar Gateway is planned space station that will orbit the Moon. It is part of the Nasa‑led Artemis programme. Artemis aims to return humans to the Moon, establishing a sustainable presence there for scientific and commercial purposes, and eventually reach Mars.

However, the modular space station now faces delays, cost concerns and potential US funding cuts. This raises a fundamental question: is an orbiting space station necessary to achieve lunar objectives, including scientific ones?

The president’s proposed 2026 budget for Nasa sought to cancel Gateway. Ultimately, push back from within the Senate led to continued funding for the lunar outpost. But debate continues among policymakers as to its value and necessity within the Artemis programme.

Cancelling Gateway would also raise deeper questions about the future of US commitment to international cooperation within Artemis. It would therefore risk eroding US influence over global partnerships that will define the future of deep space exploration.

Gateway was designed to support these ambitions by acting as a staging point for crewed and robotic missions (such as lunar rovers), as a platform for scientific research and as a testbed for technologies crucial to landing humans on Mars.

It is a multinational endeavour. Nasa is joined by four international partners, the Canadian Space Agency, the European Space Agency (Esa), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and the United Arab Emirates’ Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre.

Schematic of the Lunar Gateway.
The Lunar Gateway.
Nasa

Most components contributed by these partners have already been produced and delivered to the US for integration and testing. But the project has been beset by rising costs and persistent debates over its value.

If cancelled, the US abandonment of the most multinational component of the Artemis programme, at a time when trust in such alliances is under unprecedented strain, could be far reaching.

It will be assembled module by module, with each partner contributing components and with the possibility of additional partners joining over time.

Strategic aims

Gateway reflects a broader strategic aim of Artemis, to pursue lunar exploration through partnerships with industry and other nations, helping spread the financial cost – rather than as a sole US venture. This is particularly important amid intensifying competition – primarily with China.

China and Russia are pursuing their own multinational lunar project, a surface base called the International Lunar Research Station. Gateway could act as an important counterweight, helping reinforce US leadership at the Moon.

In its quarter-century of operation, the ISS has hosted more than 290 people from 26 countries, alongside its five international partners, including Russia. More than 4,000 experiments have been conducted in this unique laboratory.

In 2030, the ISS is due to be succeeded by separate private and national space stations in low Earth orbit. As such, Lunar Gateway could repeat the strategic, stabilising role among different nations that the ISS has played for decades.

However, it is essential to examine carefully whether Gateway’s strategic value is truly matched by its operational and financial feasibility.

It could be argued that the rest of the Artemis programme is not dependant on the lunar space station, making its rationales increasingly difficult to defend.

Some critics focus on technical issues, others say the Gateway’s original purpose has faded, while others argue that lunar missions can proceed without an orbital outpost.

Sustainable exploration

Supporters counter that the Lunar Gateway offers a critical platform for testing technology in deep space, enabling sustainable lunar exploration, fostering international cooperation and laying the groundwork for a long term human presence and economy at the Moon. The debate now centres on whether there are more effective ways to achieve these goals.

Despite uncertainties, commercial and national partners remain dedicated to delivering their commitments. Esa is supplying the International Habitation Module (IHAB) alongside refuelling and communications systems. Canada is building Gateway’s robotic arm, Canadarm3, the UAE is producing an airlock module and Japan is contributing life support systems and habitation components.

Gateway’s Halo module at a facility in Arizona operated by aerospace company Northrop Grumman.
Nasa / Josh Valcarcel

US company Northrop Grumman is responsible for developing the Habitat and Logistics Outpost (Halo), and American firm Maxar is to build the power and propulsion element (PPE). A substantial portion of this hardware has already been delivered and is undergoing integration and testing.

If the Gateway project ends, the most responsible path forward to avoid discouraging future contributors to Artemis projects would be to establish a clear plan to repurpose the hardware for other missions.

Cancellation without such a strategy risks creating a vacuum that rival coalitions, could exploit. But it could also open the door to new alternatives, potentially including one led by Esa.

Esa has reaffirmed its commitment to Gateway even if the US ultimately reconsiders its own role. For emerging space nations, access to such an outpost would help develop their capabilities in exploration. That access translates directly into geopolitical influence.

Space endeavours are expensive, risky and often difficult to justify to the public. Yet sustainable exploration beyond Earth’s orbit will require a long-term, collaborative approach rather than a series of isolated missions.

If the Gateway no longer makes technical or operational sense for the US, its benefits could still be achieved through another project.

This could be located on the lunar surface, integrated into a Mars mission or could take an entirely new form. But if the US dismisses Gateway’s value as a long term outpost without ensuring that its broader benefits are preserved, it risks missing an opportunity that will shape its long term influence in international trust, leadership and the future shape of space cooperation.The Conversation

Berna Akcali Gur, Lecturer in Outer Space Law, Queen Mary University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

South Korea introduces AI job protection legislation

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.

Published

on

South Korea is proposing laws to protect jobs from AI, balancing innovation with workers’ rights amid rising automation.


South Korean lawmakers are taking bold steps to protect workers from the growing impact of AI on employment. The proposed legislation aims to safeguard jobs and support workers transitioning into new roles as machines increasingly enter the workforce.

Professor Karen Sutherland of Uni SC joins Ticker to break down what these changes mean for employees and industries alike. She explains how the laws are designed to balance technological innovation with workers’ rights, and why proactive measures are crucial as AI adoption accelerates.

With major companies like Hyundai Motor introducing advanced robots, labour unions have raised concerns about fair treatment and the future of human labour. Experts say South Korea’s approach is faster and more comprehensive than similar initiatives in the United States and European Union, aiming to secure livelihoods while improving the quality of life for displaced workers.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#AIJobs #SouthKorea #FutureOfWork #Automation #TechPolicy #LaborRights #WorkforceInnovation #Ticker


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

U.S. ambassador responds to NATO criticism at Munich Security Conference

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.

Published

on

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.


At the Munich Security Conference, the U.S. ambassador to NATO faced tough questions on global order as European allies explored greater defense autonomy amid rising geopolitical tensions. The discussion highlighted the challenges NATO faces in maintaining unity while responding to evolving threats.

The ambassador addressed criticisms directly, emphasizing the importance of transatlantic cooperation and NATO’s role in ensuring international security. European nations voiced concerns about independent defense capabilities and the impact of hybrid warfare from Russia on regional stability.

Oz Sultan from Sultan Interactive Group provides analysis.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#MunichSecurityConference #NATO #GlobalSecurity #DefenseAutonomy #Geopolitics #TransatlanticAlliance #HybridWarfare #USForeignPolicy


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Trending Now