Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe will brief top congressional leaders on rising tensions in Iran on Tuesday ahead of President Donald Trump’s annual State of the Union address. 

Ratcliffe and Rubio, who also serves as Trump’s national security advisor, will brief the so-called ‘Gang of Eight,’ congressional leadership as well as top lawmakers on the Intelligence committees, from the White House Tuesday at 3 p.m. 

The closed-door session comes as the administration weighs next steps in the escalating standoff with the Islamic Republic. Talks with Iran, where the U.S. is pushing for full denuclearization and a limit on its ballistic missile program, are scheduled to resume on Thursday. White House envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff led talks last week with Iran that did not result in a tangible deal. 

The White House has made clear that diplomacy is Trump’s first priority, but the Middle East has seen the largest U.S. military buildup in decades: one carrier strike group under the USS Abraham Lincoln is already in the region and another under the USS Gerald R. Ford is heading that way.

Meanwhile, Iran is digging in. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi posted on X Tuesday: ‘Our fundamental convictions are crystal clear: Iran will under no circumstances ever develop a nuclear weapon; neither will we Iranians ever forgo our right to harness the dividends of peaceful nuclear technology for our people.’

In a message directed at the American side, he added: ‘A deal is within reach, but only if diplomacy is given priority.’

The U.S. has insisted Iran cannot have any nuclear enrichment capacity, even for energy purposes.

Araghchi said last week that the two sides had come to a ‘general agreement on a number of guiding principles’ and agreed to begin drafting text for a possible agreement, with plans to exchange drafts and schedule a third round of talks. 

Meanwhile, reports have swirled that Trump is considering a ‘limited’ strike on Iran aimed at pressuring its leaders into acquiescing to a deal.

Rubio’s classified briefing comes at a pivotal moment — just hours before Trump steps to the podium for his State of the Union address. The timing suggests the administration wants congressional leaders fully briefed on Iran’s nuclear posture, U.S. intelligence assessments and potential next steps before the president publicly lays out his strategy to the nation.

By meeting with the ‘Gang of Eight’ ahead of the speech, the White House is also locking in oversight consultation before Trump speaks. That gives top lawmakers the same classified context the president is working from — and makes it harder for critics to argue they were blindsided if Trump signals tougher action, new diplomatic parameters or a shift in posture toward Tehran during his address.

Related Article

Top Iran security official seen in Oman days after indirect nuclear talks with US

Erika Kirk, widow of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, will be President Donald Trump’s guest at Tuesday night’s State of the Union.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Kirk’s attendance as ‘one of President Trump’s special guests’ in a post on X that included the Daily Wire article first reporting the announcement.

During his speech, the president will reportedly affirm that America is ‘one nation under God’ and will call on Congress to ‘firmly reject political violence against our fellow citizens,’ the Daily Wire reported on Tuesday. The Daily Wire said the call comes after years of political violence, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Trump is no stranger to this wave of political violence, as he was shot during a campaign rally in Butler, Pa., in July 2024.

Trump administration officials rallied around Erika Kirk after her husband’s assassination in September during a debate event at Utah Valley University. Charlie Kirk’s casket was flown from Utah to his home state of Arizona aboard Air Force Two and Vice President JD Vance escorted the casket as it was carried onto the plane. Later, second lady Usha Vance was seen holding Erika’s hand as they departed Air Force Two.

Several members of the Trump administration, including the president and vice president, took part in a memorial service for Charlie Kirk in Arizona on Sept. 21, 2025, just 11 days after the outspoken conservative icon was killed. During his address at the memorial service, Trump called Charlie Kirk a ‘martyr for American freedom.’

A little more than a month after his assassination, Charlie Kirk was posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom on what would have been his 32nd birthday. Erika Kirk accepted the medal from Trump on behalf of her late husband. She said that in awarding Charlie with the nation’s highest civilian honor, the president had given her late husband ‘the best birthday gift he could ever have.’

‘Charlie always admired your commitment to freedom, and that’s something that both of you shared. So thank you,’ Erika Kirk said to Trump during the event. ‘Your support of our family and the work that Charlie devoted his life to will be something I cherish forever.’

Erika Kirk also thanked the vice president and second lady, saying that their friendship had been an ‘unbelievable encouragement.’

Charlie Kirk was 31 when he was killed and left behind his wife and two young children — a son and a daughter.

Related Article

Judge dismisses defense push to remove prosecutors from Charlie Kirk murder case

Iran is nearing a deal with China to acquire supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, a move that could significantly raise the stakes in the Middle East as U.S. carrier strike groups assemble within striking distance of the Islamic Republic.

Reuters reported Tuesday that Tehran is close to finalizing an agreement for Chinese-made CM-302 missiles, citing six people with knowledge of the negotiations.

The supersonic weapons, which can travel roughly 180 miles and fly low to evade ship defenses, would enhance Iran’s ability to target U.S. naval forces operating in the region.

The deal is near completion, though no delivery date has been agreed, the people said. It is unclear how many missiles are involved, how much Iran has agreed to pay, or whether China will ultimately proceed given heightened regional tensions.

Reuters reported that negotiations accelerated after last year’s 12-day war between Israel and Iran, which left Tehran’s military infrastructure strained and heightened regional tensions.

The reported deal comes as President Donald Trump warns Tehran of consequences if it fails to curb its nuclear program, while the Pentagon has deployed multiple carrier strike groups to the region, including USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R. Ford. The buildup marks one of the largest U.S. naval deployments in the region in recent years.

Trump said on Feb. 19 he was giving Iran 10 days to reach an agreement over its nuclear program or face potential military action.

A White House official told Fox News Digital that the president remains firm that Iran cannot develop nuclear weapons or enrich uranium.

‘The president would like to see a deal negotiated, but he has been clear that ‘either we will make a deal or we will have to do something very tough like last time,’’ the official said when asked for comment on the reported approaching Iran-China deal.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last week appeared to threaten U.S. warships directly.

‘More dangerous than that warship is the weapon that can send that warship to the bottom of the sea,’ Khamenei wrote on Feb. 17 on X.

Military analysts say a Chinese transfer of supersonic anti-ship missiles could complicate U.S. naval operations in the Persian Gulf and surrounding waters.

‘It’s a complete game-changer if Iran has supersonic capability to attack ships in the area,’ Danny Citrinowicz, a former Israeli intelligence officer and senior Iran researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, told Reuters. ‘These missiles are very difficult to intercept.’

Still, U.S. forces maintain layered defenses against Iranian threats, including Patriot missile batteries, Navy destroyers equipped with Standard Missile interceptors and F-35 stealth fighters, Fox News Digital reported.

Last year, Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean intercepted Iranian ballistic missiles using SM-3 interceptors, while Marine Corps F-35Cs operating from USS Abraham Lincoln shot down Iranian drones that approached U.S. assets, according to U.S. Central Command.

Iran has also relied on swarming fast boats, ballistic missiles and drones in past confrontations with U.S. forces.

The White House did not directly address the reported missile negotiations when asked by Reuters. China’s foreign ministry told the outlet it was not aware of the talks.

The potential transfer would mark one of the most advanced Chinese weapons systems supplied to Iran in decades and could test U.S. sanctions authorities if finalized.

As U.S. forces fan out across the region, defense officials have stressed that the buildup is designed to deter Iranian aggression — but warned they are prepared for combat if diplomacy fails.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Related Article

Iran launches war drills in Hormuz Strait as US carrier is flying missions 24/7 before Geneva talks

The U.S. Postal Service cannot be sued for damages for intentionally failing to deliver mail, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision released Tuesday.

The majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, ruled the government’s sovereign immunity bars claims for undelivered mail. 

‘The United States enjoys sovereign immunity and cannot be sued without its consent,’ Thomas wrote, citing the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) granting ‘sovereign immunity for a wide range of claims about mail.’

‘Specifically, the FTCA’s postal exception retains sovereign immunity for all claims ‘arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter,’’ he continued, adding, ‘This case concerns whether this exception applies when postal workers intentionally fail to deliver the mail. We hold that it does.’

The case, U.S. Postal Service v. Konan, stemmed from a dispute between Texas landlord Lebene Konan and her local post office. Konan alleged that postal workers in Euless, Texas, intentionally withheld and returned mail addressed to her and her tenants at two rental properties she owned, causing financial harm and emotional distress.

After her administrative complaints failed, Konan sued the United States in federal court, asserting state law claims including nuisance, tortious interference and conversion. A federal district court dismissed her claims, citing the FTCA’s postal exception, which preserves immunity for ‘any claim arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter.’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit revived the lawsuit, ruling the exception did not apply to intentional acts of nondelivery. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to resolve a split among federal appeals courts.

Reversing the Fifth Circuit, the high court held that the ordinary meaning of ‘loss’ and ‘miscarriage’ at the time Congress enacted the FTCA in 1946 encompassed mail that fails to arrive at its destination, regardless of whether the failure was negligent or intentional.

‘A ‘miscarriage of mail’ includes failure of the mail to arrive at its intended destination, regardless of the carrier’s intent or where the mail goes instead,’ Thomas wrote.

The decision vacates the Fifth Circuit’s ruling and sends the case back for further proceedings, though the justices did not decide whether all of Konan’s claims are barred.

‘We hold that the postal exception covers suits against the United States for the intentional nondelivery of mail,’ Thomas concluded. ‘We do not decide whether all of Konan’s claims are barred by the postal exception, or which arguments Konan adequately preserved.

Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion, arguing that the postal exception was meant to cover negligent mistakes, not intentional misconduct.

‘Today, the majority concludes that the postal exception captures, and therefore protects, the intentional nondelivery of mail, even when that nondelivery was driven by malicious reasons,’ she dissented.

Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the three liberal justices – Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – in the dissent.

The ruling underscores the limits of the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity and narrows the circumstances in which individuals can seek damages for mail-related harms, even when they allege deliberate wrongdoing by postal employees.

Related Article

Trump’s tariff revenues hit record highs as Supreme Court deals major blow

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s first option for Iran is ‘always diplomacy,’ but that he is ‘willing to use the lethal force of the United States military if necessary.’ 

The remarks come after Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday that ‘it will be a very bad day’ for Iran if the country can’t strike a deal over its nuclear program. 

‘President Trump’s first option is always diplomacy. But as he has shown, he is willing to use the lethal force of the United States military if necessary. So the president is always the final decision-maker around here,’ Leavitt said Tuesday. 

‘And I’ve seen a lot of sensationalist reporting over the past day that is just completely untrue. And anyone speculating to the media hiding behind an anonymous source, pretending to know what President Trump is thinking, or a decision he will make with respect to action against Iran has no idea what they’re talking about,’ she added. 

The president told reporters last week that he is ‘considering’ a limited military strike on Iran to pressure its leaders into reaching a deal over its nuclear program. 

The U.S. has recently been increasing its military assets in the Middle East, sending the USS Gerald R. Ford and its strike group toward the region. 

The USS Abraham Lincoln and three guided-missile destroyers already are in the area. 

‘Everything that has been written about a potential War with Iran has been written incorrectly, and purposefully so. I am the one that makes the decision, I would rather have a Deal than not but, if we don’t make a Deal, it will be a very bad day for that Country and, very sadly, its people, because they are great and wonderful, and something like this should never have happened to them,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday. 

It goes against the very instincts of some of the most powerful officials in the U.S.: get all dressed up, appear before a national TV audience, but sit there like statues without betraying any words or emotion.

For members of the Supreme Court, enduring the annual State of the Union address is a civic exercise in poker-faced discretion. As recent history has shown, that has not always been easy.

Tuesday’s speech by President Donald Trump will be watched closely not only for what is said, but also for who will be there in person to hear it — especially an undetermined number of justices with front-row seats.

This year’s appearances are especially of interest, coming four days after a 6-3 majority of the court struck down the president’s sweeping tariffs, in a sweeping setback to his economic agenda.

Trump lashed out sharply at the court, especially the six members who voted against him, including two he appointed to the bench — Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

The president said he was ‘ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country.’

At least one member of the bench, Justice Samuel Alito, has previously stated he will likely no longer go — after lingering, dramatic criticism leveled at a court ruling by Obama in his 2010 address.

But one or more justices have almost always attended the annual speech to Congress and the nation in recent decades. Court members are not required by law to be there, but custom has dictated their appearance, mostly for show. They are a key, if low-key, part of the pageantry, and are compelled to sit politely and stoically, amid the often high-spirited partisan rhetoric and response of the event.

There is no word yet from the high court on who will appear. Invitations are sent to each chamber, and the justices have individual discretion over whether to go.

Those who do traditionally wear their judicial robes, are escorted into the House as a group, and take prominent seats up front.

Retired justices usually get asked as well, minus the robes. They are joined by other officers of the court, such as the marshal and clerk.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elana Kagan, along with former Justices Stephen Breyer and Anthony Kennedy, have been regular attendees over the years.

But the ceremony put the justices in a highly uncomfortable position in 2010.

Democrats cheered President Barack Obama when he dressed down high court conservatives for its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, issued a week earlier, which removed legal barriers preventing corporations and unions from spending unlimited sums on federal elections.

‘With all due deference to the separation of powers,’ Obama said, ‘the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.’

Alito, sitting just feet away in the audience, shook his head and mouthed words interpreted as ‘not true,’ referring to the line about ‘foreign corporations,’ court sources later confirmed.

Alito’s five fellow justices in attendance showed no emotion.

He had been a regular at previous addresses, but months after the incident, Alito told an audience in New York that he felt ‘like the proverbial potted plant’ and would not be attending in the near future. In fact, the year after the presidential dress-down, Alito was in Hawaii at a law school symposium.

The now 75-year-old justice also, with a smile, noted that his colleagues ‘who are more disciplined, refrain from manifesting any emotion or opinion whatsoever.’

Roberts labeled the political atmosphere at the 2010 address ‘very troubling.’

The head of the federal judiciary has said partisan rhetoric and gestures aimed at the court left him questioning whether his colleagues should continue to attend.

During that 2010 address, members of Congress sat just behind the justices, many applauding loudly when Obama made his remarks about the court’s election spending case, especially Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

‘It does cause me to think whether or not it makes sense for us to be there’ Roberts said weeks after the controversy. ‘To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I’m not sure why we’re there.’

Then-White House press secretary Robert Gibbs responded quickly at the time with an indirect attack on Roberts, saying ‘the only thing troubling’ was the Citizens United ruling itself.

Regardless, Roberts has never missed a State of the Union as chief justice.

That included 2021 with President Joe Biden’s address to a joint session of Congress that was limited in attendance because of the pandemic. The sparse, widely-separated crowd included Roberts, a few Cabinet officers and a smattering of congressional members, all wearing masks.

Some justices were regular no-shows at the State of the Union, including John Paul Stevens, who stepped down from the court months after the 2010 State of the Union.

Roberts’ predecessor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also rarely appeared in person, once because he considered a painting class more preferable.

Justice Clarence Thomas called it ‘very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there.’ He went to Obama’s first annual address in 2009, but has not been back since.

‘There’s a lot that you don’t hear on TV,’ he once said, ‘the catcalls, the whooping, hollering and under-the breath comments.’

Another more vocal no-go was the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who compared the televised State of the Union to ‘cheerleading sessions.’

‘I don’t know at what point that happened, but it has happened, and now you go and sit there like bumps on a log while applause lines cause one half of the Congress to leap up while [another line] causes the other half to leap up,’ he once said. ‘It is a juvenile spectacle. And I resent being called upon to give it dignity.’

He last attended the event in 1997, but did attend a special joint session of Congress after the 9/11 terror attacks in 2001, with four other justices.

Scalia, a generally verbose and animated jurist, said bluntly: ‘You just sit there, looking stupid.’

Even remarks touching on supposedly nonpartisan topics like patriotism, war veterans and puppy dogs leave the justices in a quandary: should they applaud, should they stand and applaud or do neither? The protocols are never clear, and the public might view the court members as aloof or uncaring if they offer no reaction during, say, a salute to Martin Luther King Jr.’s memory, when everyone else is shown engaging in bipartisan applause in the chamber.   

One ‘extra-court-ricular’ event that is a must-attend for the Supreme Court is the presidential inauguration. All nine members were at last year’s public swearing-in for Trump to a second four-year term. Roberts and Kavanaugh had official duties to administer the oaths of office to the president and vice president, respectively, but the other seven justices only had to sit there, again quietly, in the Capitol Rotunda.

Breyer is the one justice who might be called a ‘regular’ at the State of the Union, going to nearly all of them since joining the court in 1994, including one in his retirement.

He missed President Bill Clinton’s last annual address in 2000 because of the flu. That year, no justices were in attendance.

Many believe the justices have to go to such events, that it is just another unwanted chore of office. Not so, Breyer told us in 2005. ‘People attend if they wish to attend. I do wish to attend, so I go.’

Here’s a list of Supreme Court members attending recent State of the Union or equivalent Joint Session of Congress addresses in recent years, based on Fox News research and congressional records. Names are listed by seniority:

– 2025: John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Anthony Kennedy (retired)

– 2024: Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Kennedy (retired)

– 2023: Roberts, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson, Kennedy, Stephen Breyer (retired)

– 2022: Roberts, Breyer, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett

– 2021: Roberts (limited speech attendance because of pandemic)

– 2020: Roberts, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh

– 2019: Roberts, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh

– 2018: Roberts, Breyer, Kagan, Gorsuch

– 2017: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan

– 2016: Roberts, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan

– 2015: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan

– 2014: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan

– 2013: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan 

– 2012: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan

– 2011: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan

– 2010: Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sotomayor

– 2009: Roberts, Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito

– 2008: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Alito

– 2007: Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, Alito

– 2006: Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, Alito

– 2005: Breyer

– 2004: Breyer

– 2003: Breyer

– 2002: Kennedy, Breyer

– 2001: Breyer

– 2000: None

– 1999: Sandra Day O’Connor, Kennedy, David Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer

– 1998: William Rehnquist, O’Connor, Souter, Thomas, Breyer

– 1997: Antonin Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Byron White (retired)

– 1996: Rehnquist, O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer

– 1995: Rehnquist, O’Connor, Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, Harry Blackmun (retired)

Related Article

EXCLUSIVE: Trump to center SOTU on working families with sweeping economic case

A federal court ruling Monday has essentially locked in a new Utah congressional redistricting map that would create a Democrat-heavy Salt Lake City-based seat, potentially flipping one of Utah’s Republican-held U.S. House seats.

A special three-judge federal panel is allowing a revised congressional redistricting map in Utah to go into effect, rejecting an effort by state Republicans to block it. The judicial panel denied a Republican-led request for a preliminary injunction to put the new map on hold.

The new voting boundaries give Democrats a better shot at winning Utah’s 1st Congressional District, a seat currently held by Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah.

Two of Utah’s other four GOP seat-holders in Congress – Rep. Burgess Owens, R-Utah; and Rep. Celeste Maloy, R-Utah – had signed on to the challenge but have accepted the decision in a joint statement.

‘We receive today’s decision with profound disappointment but respect for the Court’s careful review,’ the statement, shared on X by Owens, read. ‘This case concerns the Constitution’s allocation of authority over federal elections, a question of lasting importance beyond any single election cycle.’

‘Having these issues heard has strengthened public understanding and clarified what is at stake,’ the statement continued. ‘We remain convinced that the Constitution assigns this responsibility to the State’s lawmaking authority and that this principle is essential to preserving constitutional order and the rule of law.’

A state judge had ordered the new map, striking congressional voting lines adopted by the state legislature after the 2020 census. A state voter referendum had approved anti-gerrymandering standards. The Utah Supreme Court, in recent days, had also rejected the original map crafted by the GOP-controlled legislature.

The federal panel’s decision rested on the ‘Purcell principle’ — the idea that judicial interference so close to an election causes ‘chaos and confusion.’

Though the GOP can still appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court for emergency relief, the judges warned that any further ‘tinkering’ would come too late to prevent electoral disruption for the 2026 midterms.

Utah Republican Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson took no position on the case, but did tell the court she needed to have a decision by Monday in order to implement the proper redistricting map, according to the ruling.

Early race ratings from The Cook Political Report have already shifted this district from ‘Solid Republican’ to ‘Solid Democratic.’

Moore’s northern Utah seat is being renumbered to the 2nd Congressional District, a seat which is currently held by Maloy. Owens currently holds the 4th Congressional District, while Rep. Mike Kennedy, R-Utah, holds the GOP’s 3rd Congressional District seat.

President Donald Trump has acknowledged the difficult history for sitting presidents’ parties in midterm elections, and the current House GOP majority is held by a slim margin of 218-214 with three current vacancies: Former Rep. Mike Sherrill, D-N.J., who resigned to become New Jersey’s governor; former Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene, R-Ga., who resigned at the start of the congressional year; and late Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif., who died Jan. 6.

Fox News’ Bill Mears contributed to this report.

Related Article

Maryland House approves new congressional map as Senate leaders warn of risks

A new study aims to jolt Israel’s security and technology establishment into embracing a new post-Oct. 7, 2023, business model that will advance the U.S.-Israel strategic partnership in the heart of the Middle East and across the globe.

The Henry Jackson Society study titled ‘Israel 2048: A Blueprint for a Rising Asymmetric Geopolitical Power’ jumps into the future, with a view toward advancing American and Israeli security interests.

Co-author of the report, Barak M. Seener, told Fox News Digital that America requires Israel for ‘its security architecture in the region via the Abraham Accords and, more broadly, will be a force multiplier regarding the technological edge against China.’

During President Donald Trump’s first term, his administration sealed diplomatic normalization deals between Sunni Gulf and North African countries: Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Sudan and Israel.

Seener and co-author David Wurmser argue that there is a pressing need to reframe the U.S.–Israel strategic partnership ‘around technology,’ and ‘shift from military aid dependency towards joint R&D and investment in shared technological platforms in defence-tech, AI, quantum computing and next generational warfare capabilities.’

They wrote, ‘Israel must prioritize passing negotiated regulations for technology sharing to prevent AI/ quantum technology leakage to China.’

Seener noted that the Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy (released in January) describes Israel as a strategic military partner. ‘That has never happened before.’

He continued, ‘Israel is not only achieving regional dominance but international power by connecting trade routes and digital connectivity. Israel simply cannot remain in a purely defensive posture and hunker down and react to threats on its borders.’ 

Seener said following Israel’s successful air war campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran in June 2025, ‘America now wants to be part of this success story. ‘

He argues that President Donald Trump entered on the side of Israel with military attacks because ‘Israel demonstrated intelligence acumen and military prowess. For the first time, America joined Israel’ in the prosecution of a war.

Consequently, Seener said Israel’s ‘defense technology makes it indispensable for nations.’

Seener and Wurmser’s 51-page study contains granular information on how the U.S. can strengthen American security and recommend embedding ‘Israel as a defense-tech and deep-tech power that is indispensable to Western security and global technological competition in supply chains for AI, semiconductors, missile defense, cyber capabilities and critical materials. Israel’s technological dominance must be leveraged to anchor alliances and shape global supply chains.’

The wobbliness of America’s European partners is also highlighted to show the need for Israel to ‘Accelerate domestic lines of production of critical military systems, munitions and energy infrastructure to reduce vulnerability to foreign political pressure such as Europe’s growing ambivalence, coupled with episodic constraints on arms transfers,’ according to the authors.

Earlier this month, Britain’s left-leaning government reportedly denied the U.S. military’s use of British bases to strike Iran.

Israel is uniquely positioned to help regenerate relations among Western powers, the study notes. According to the authors, there is an opportunity to ‘use Israel’s defense-tech, quantum computing, AI and cyber capabilities as a tool of statecraft to deepen alliances, deter political isolation and strengthen influence in Europe, the Gulf and Asia.’

Seener said, ‘Israel is not a superpower but a geopolitical power that gives nations a force multiplier, and they benefit from Israel as a tech defense nation.’

Related Article

Trump’s America First strategy builds deterrence through strong US-Israel alliance, experts say

France has restricted U.S. Ambassador Charles Kushner’s access to senior government officials after he failed to attend a summons from the French Foreign Ministry over comments regarding the death of a French activist.

Speaking Tuesday in an interview with public broadcaster France Info, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said Kushner’s decision not to appear at the Quai d’Orsay ‘will naturally affect his ability to carry out his mission in our country,’ and demanded ‘explanations’ from the ambassador.

Barrot described the no-show as a ‘surprise,’ saying that when an ambassador has ‘the honor of representing your country in France,’ they are expected to ‘respect the most basic practices of diplomacy’ and respond to summons from the ministry.

The diplomatic dispute stems from social media posts by official U.S. government accounts following the death of Quentin Deranque, a 23-year-old activist who was killed in Lyon earlier this month.

The Associated Press reported that Deranque, described as a fervent nationalist, was beaten during clashes between far-left and far-right activists and later died of brain injuries sustained in the attack.

‘Reports, corroborated by the French Minister of the Interior, that Quentin Deranque was killed by left-wing militants, should concern us all. Violent radical leftism is on the rise and its role in Quentin Deranque’s death demonstrates the threat it poses to public safety,’ the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism said in a Feb. 19 post on X. ‘We will continue to monitor the situation and expect to see the perpetrators of violence brought to justice.’

The U.S. Embassy in France later shared the statement on its official account.

Barrot said the remarks amounted to an ‘injunction’ toward France and rejected what he characterized as foreign interference in the country’s domestic political debate. 

‘We have no lessons to learn in matters of maintaining order or public order in matters of violence and we have no lessons to learn at all from the reactionary international, simply,’ he told France Info.

The State Department did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Barrot said Kushner could regain access to French officials if he provides clarification to the ministry, stressing that the dispute would not alter broader relations between France and the United States. 

He noted the two countries are preparing to mark the 250th anniversary of their historic alliance this year and expressed hope that cooperation would continue ‘in this spirit.’

Related Article

Witkoff and Kushner scheduled to meet Putin in Moscow

A new study aims to jolt Israel’s security and technology establishment into embracing a new post-Oct. 7, 2023 business model that will advance the U.S.-Israel strategic partnership in the heart of the Middle East and across the globe.

The Henry Jackson Society study titled ‘Israel 2048: A Blueprint for a Rising Asymmetric Geopolitical Power’ jumps into the future, with a view toward advancing American and Israeli security interests.

Co-author of the report, Barak M. Seener, told Fox News Digital that America requires Israel for ‘its security architecture in the region via the Abraham Accords and, more broadly, will be a force multiplier regarding the technological edge against China.’

During President Donald Trump’s first term, his administration sealed diplomatic normalization deals between Sunni Gulf and North African countries: Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Sudan and Israel.

Seener and co-author David Wurmser argue that there is a pressing need to reframe the U.S.–Israel strategic partnership ‘around technology,’ and ‘shift from military aid dependency towards joint R&D and investment in shared technological platforms in defence-tech, AI, quantum computing and next generational warfare capabilities.’

They wrote, ‘Israel must prioritize passing negotiated regulations for technology sharing to prevent AI/ quantum technology leakage to China.’

Seener noted that the U.S. Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy (released in January) describes Israel as a strategic military partner. That hat has never happened before.’

He continued that ‘Israel is not only achieving regional dominance but international power by connecting trade routes and digital connectivity. Israel simply cannot remain in a purely defensive posture and hunker down and react to threats on its borders.’ 

Seener said following Israel’s successful air war campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran in June 2025, ‘America now wants to be part of this success story. ‘

He argues that President Donald Trump entered on the side of Israel with military attacks because ‘Israel demonstrated intelligence acumen and military prowess. For the first time, America joined Israel’ in the prosecution of a war.

Consequently, Seener said Israel’s ‘defense technology makes it indispensable for nations.’

Seener and Wurmser’s 51-page study contains granular information on how the U.S. can strengthen American security and recommend embedding ‘Israel as a defense-tech and deep-tech power that is indispensable to Western security and global technological competition in supply chains for AI, semiconductors, missile defense, cyber capabilities and critical materials. Israel’s technological dominance must be leveraged to anchor alliances and shape global supply chains.’

The wobbliness of America’s European partners is also highlighted to show the need for Israel to ‘Accelerate domestic lines of production of critical military systems, munitions and energy infrastructure to reduce vulnerability to foreign political pressure such as Europe’s growing ambivalence, coupled with episodic constraints on arms transfers,’ according to the authors.

Earlier this month, Britain’s left-leaning government reportedly denied the U.S. military’s use of British bases to strike the Islamic Republic.

Israel is uniquely positioned to help regenerate relations among Western powers, the study notes. According to the authors, there is an opportunity to ‘use Israel’s defense-tech, quantum computing, AI and cyber capabilities as a tool of statecraft to deepen alliances, deter political isolation and strengthen influence in Europe, the Gulf and Asia.’

Seener said that ‘Israel is not a superpower but a geopolitical power that gives nations a force multiplier, and they benefit from Israel as a tech defense nation.’

Related Article

Trump’s America First strategy builds deterrence through strong US-Israel alliance, experts say