This is the Oct. 22, 2026, edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.
“Have they forgotten that people who turn their backs on friends often lose what they cherish most for themselves?”
— Ronald Reagan, April 5, 1982
The president of the United States and the people around him have never understood American history or our constitutional republic’s special place in the world. Because they don’t know that history, they have twisted the meaning of Western civilization from the elevation of individual rights over ruling monarchs and autocrats to political battles over a handful of trans athletes.
Western civilization is not about culture wars or campaigns of conquest. It is defined by the advancement of freedom, science, reason, and discovery.
It is the belief that every individual has dignity, that people find the truth by freely asking questions, and that even the powerful must always answer to the law.
One of the best definitions comes from Winston Churchill in July 1938, as Hitler threatened Czechoslovakia:
“It means a society based upon the opinion of civilians. It means that violence, the rule of warriors and despotic chiefs, the conditions of camps and warfare, of riot and tyranny, give place to parliaments where laws are made, and independent courts of justice in which over long periods those laws are maintained. That is Civilization — and in its soil grow continually freedom, comfort, and culture.”
The West’s birth cry came at the Battle of Marathon in 490 B.C. Against all odds, Athenian citizen-soldiers drove back the mighty Persian Empire.
The March of the Ten Thousand 90 years later found Greek soldiers stranded in Persia after their generals were murdered. Instead of surrendering as armies of the East would do, these mercenaries elected their own leaders and fought their way home — electrifying the rising West. Free men who governed themselves suddenly mattered more than generals or kings.
In 1215, English barons forced King John to accept that even a king must abide by the law. Donald Trump would do well to read the Magna Carta.
Joan of Arc showed how even a young peasant girl could make a difference by rallying a broken France and lifting the siege of Orléans.
Churchill refused to bargain with Hitler, a small group of pilots in the Royal Air Force saved a nation, and the British people defended Western civilization until the New World, in all its might, arrived to join the cause.
On June 6, 1944, Americans and their allies stormed Normandy to free a continent, not conquer it.
In 1989, ordinary people tore down the Berlin Wall with hammers and bare hands, as the West’s twilight battle against Soviet aggression ended in victory.
In 1989, the front line of freedom ran through Berlin. In the 1990s, it moved east to Poland and the Baltics. Today it runs through the heart of Ukraine — and the American president has sided with the invader against Western freedom.
In appeasing Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump is betraying more than Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
He is betraying more than the Ukrainian fighters protecting their wives, children, and homes.
He is betraying more than our allies in Poland, the Baltics, and across the East.
He is betraying the very idea of Western civilization.
That idea born at Marathon, written into the Magna Carta, defended in the skies over London, won back at Normandy, and set free at the Berlin Wall.
The West has never been about who plays on girls’ softball teams. It has always been about whether free nations stand together when tyrants and despots invade free countries and start redrawing their borders with tanks.
Donald Trump’s betrayal of Western democracy will forever darken his legacy in shame unless he starts defending freedom soon.
I am not optimistic.
Source: New York Times/Siena poll of 3,494 voters conducted Oct. 16-19, 2026. Margin of error: +/- 1.9 percentage points
On Oct. 22, 1962, President John F. Kennedy announced in a televised address that the Soviet Union was building nuclear missile sites in Cuba and that the United States would impose a naval quarantine on offensive weapons bound for the island.
Katty Kay on Trump 2.0
“The story of this administration is one of incompetence — they just aren’t very good at what they’re trying to do. They have the ideology, but they’re there because they’re loyal to President Trump, not because they have expertise in what they’re doing. People around the country are exhausted and frustrated: This is not a well-run government, and a government that’s not well run doesn’t produce good results for its voters.”
David French on corruption and the cost of living
“Every two days, there’s a new story about the Trump family enriching itself or about people using money to influence the pardon process. While people are struggling with their paychecks, there’s a French-aristocracy feel from this incredibly gilded White House. The combination of economic headwinds and corruption is really fanning the political flames.
Jonathan Lemire on the president’s squandered capital
“Trump completed arguably the greatest political comeback in U.S. history in 2024, and then proceeded in 2025 to enact his agenda. Now the administration has blown almost all of that political capital on hard-line deportation and the war in Iran. They’re underwater on every issue, including ones that used to be strengths.”
The post Joe Scarborough: Trump is betraying the very idea of Western civilization appeared first on MS NOW.
“I think that everything that Israel has done since the 7th of October is justified. Israel should not suffer.”
These words were spoken last month by Milorad Dodik, the de facto leader of Republika Srpska, the Serb-majority entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH).
This statement was hardly surprising. In recent years, Dodik has been outspoken in his support for Israel and its genocidal war on Gaza at a time in which relations between Republika Srpska and Israel are growing.
From high-level political endorsements and the opening of an Israeli Chamber of Commerce office in Banja Luka to increasingly explicit expressions of mutual solidarity. Such growing alignment speaks to how both leaderships are seeking to bolster their international legitimacy amid mounting political pressures.
For Dodik, deep relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could strengthen his access to Washington and bolster his long-standing ambitions to expand the Bosnian-Serb entity’s autonomy, while Israel may see the relationship as an opportunity to cultivate new allies and increase its diplomatic leverage in Europe.
The implications, however, extend beyond bilateral cooperation. In BiH, where the fragile constitutional order rests on the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement, the growing alignment raises questions about the international legitimisation of separatism, the resurgence of ethnic and religious nationalist narratives, and Brussels’ ability to preserve stability in Europe’s “Inner Courtyard.”
Republika Srpska’s mounting tensions with some Western European governments and international institutions provide some of the necessary context for understanding the significance of Israel’s growing engagement with the Bosnian-Serb entity.
According to Dr Asim Mujkić, an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Sarajevo, the sharp decline in international support for Israel’s government has made Tel Aviv more open to unconventional partnerships.
By engaging with Dodik publicly, Israel demonstrates its ability to maintain existing partnerships while forging new ones. At the same time, Israel’s ties to the Republika Srpska government may provide Tel Aviv with greater leverage in its dealings with European powers.
“I would say the ever-growing lack of international support for [Netanyahu’s] government, the rise of criticism and even boycott by traditionally amicable countries and organisations made Netanyahu open to political adventurism of this kind. For [the] domestic public it is surely advantageous to be able to show that some political leaders in fact visit Israel,” he told The New Arab.
Giorgio Fruscione, a research fellow at the Milan-based Italian Institute for International Political Studies, sees a related but broader set of motivations. He holds that Netanyahu’s government seeks international legitimacy via relationships with political actors that have strong connections to Washington and Moscow.
Fruscione also understands disputes over the interpretation of the Srebrenica genocide as part of the political context shaping Israel-Republika Srpska relations.
Viewed at a regional level, the expansion of Israel’s partnerships with actors in the Balkans serves to counter the influence of Iran, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, which have their own networks in southeastern Europe.
Put simply, while Israeli officials will frequently stress the importance of commercial cooperation, trade, and investment with Republika Srpska, Albania, and other players in the Balkans, there is no denying that the significance of these partnerships goes beyond stated economic objectives.
Above all these considerations, Dodik’s main motivation for establishing closer ties with Israel seems to be his desire to enhance his access to Washington.
Although Dodik was officially removed from the Republika Srpska presidency last year, he remains the de facto leader in Banja Luka, and the Bosnian-Serb strongman is determined to continue advancing his political agenda at the expense of BiH’s fragile stability. International support, therefore, remains valuable to Dodik as he pursues his political ambitions, even if full independence is not necessarily his ultimate goal.
In terms of cultivating deeper ties with the Trump administration, Dodik has relied on conventional lobbying. But that alone might not suffice for the Bosnian-Serb leader, who can probably count on Netanyahu as a key intermediary in Washington.
Support, or at least accommodation, from the United States and Russia has benefited Dodik’s political position. With an Israeli Chamber of Commerce office opening in Banja Luka and officials from Republika Srpska and Israel increasing their public engagement, Dodik has an easier time presenting his leadership as globally connected instead of isolated.
At the heart of Dodik’s desire to bolster ties with the United States, Russia, and Israel is his interest in obtaining greater bargaining power when dealing with other actors in BiH and internationally. By invoking independence without necessarily attempting to establish Republika Srpska as an independent state (a process that would be extremely challenging and messy in practice), Dodik can gain such leverage.
There are important economic and security dimensions to Israel and Republika Srpska’s deepening ties. Dodik wants greater cooperation with Israel in technology and investment, while Netanyahu’s government is focused on energy and security as key areas of this bilateral relationship.
Yet, given the lack of concrete details available to the general public, the scale and scope of this envisioned economic cooperation remain unclear.
Nonetheless, with Republika Srpska under financial pressure, it is understandable that the leadership in Banja Luka would welcome Israeli capital alongside any political advantages that could come from this growing partnership.
Republika Srpska’s growing ties with Israel should be understood in the context of Belgrade’s relationship with Tel Aviv, given Serbia’s influence in Banja Luka. Particularly in the area of defence, Serbia has strengthened its relationship with Israel, underscored by the establishment of a drone assembly plant involving Israeli defence company Elbit Systems and Belgrade’s arms exports to Tel Aviv.
Fruscione holds that Republika Srpska’s foreign policy is not entirely independent and that Banja Luka’s international relationships remain closely connected to Serbia’s priorities on the international stage.
“Republika Srpska does not have an autonomous foreign policy. Although it may appear so, it is aligned with, if not even piloted by Belgrade. Therefore, relations between Israel and Republika Srpska must be understood within this framework,” he explained to The New Arab.
This perspective places Republika Srpska’s growing partnership with Tel Aviv within a broader network of political and economic relationships linking its leadership with Belgrade, Moscow, and Washington.
These relationships reflect overlapping, and at times competing, efforts to secure external support and advance political interests. The relationship with Israel also intersects with political cooperation between Milorad Dodik’s Alliance of Independent Social Democrats and the Croatian Democratic Union of Bosnia and Herzegovina, BiH’s principal Croat nationalist party.
Both parties have sought changes to aspects of BiH’s political arrangements, particularly those affecting entity autonomy, political representation, and the distribution of power, although their objectives and interests are not identical.
According to Dr Mujkić, the Netanyahu government’s engagement with Serb and Croat nationalist leaders risks reinforcing political forces that challenge BiH’s Daytonian balance. Taken together, these relationships could increase pressure on the institutions in Sarajevo and complicate efforts to develop a coordinated Bosnian foreign policy.
They also create a regional dynamic in which developments involving Tel Aviv become increasingly intertwined with Belgrade’s ambitions, internal divisions within BiH, and competing US and Russian interests amid an era of intensifying great-power competition.
"Netanyahu’s government has supported [the Croat nationalist hard-liners of the] ethnic party in Bosnia, HDZ, even economically through the presence of Amir Kabiri, [an] Israeli businessman who not only supported Croat nationalism but also distorted [the representation of the] Bosnian Jewish community. It has supported Serb nationalist hard-liners as well, so of course, such a policy [threatens the] Dayton equilibrium,” he told The New Arab.
According to Dr Mujkić, both nationalist movements have increasingly incorporated Christian nationalism and claims of an “Islamist danger” posed by Bosniaks into their political rhetoric.
The irony of history is that contemporary Croat nationalism is heir to the ideology of the Nazi-allied Independent State of Croatia, which sought to exterminate local Jews. Meanwhile, contemporary Serb nationalism draws on a radical nationalist tradition that, under Milan Nedić’s collaborationist regime in 1941, proudly declared Serbia the first Judenrein country in the ‘new Europe’
"Yet today, these are - and not, for example, [the] Jewish Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina - [who] are the ‘allies’ of [Netanyahu],” Dr Mujkić told The New Arab.
Republika Srpska’s strengthening relationship with Israel stands to reinforce a political environment in which there is greater acceptance of serious challenges to BiH’s territorial dignity.
This development, as Dr Mujkić explains, fits into a wider geopolitical pattern in which Moscow’s support for local nationalist movements and shifts in Washington’s foreign policy during the Trump 2.0 era risk weakening the European Union’s capacity to respond to instability in the Western Balkans.
As Fruscione told The New Arab, Israeli support is not creating a new secessionist dynamic in BiH. Yet, it might accelerate one already underway, particularly as the EU’s internal divisions serve to complicate Brussels’ engagement with the Balkan country.
The challenges surrounding the appointment of a new High Representative, whose office provides a critical international safeguard for the Dayton framework, highlight the serious issues facing the existing system of oversight.
However, the eventual consequences of the strengthening Republika Srpska-Israel relationship remain uncertain. Tel Aviv’s growing engagement may help Dodik bolster his international standing and bargaining power, but how far Washington or Tel Aviv would go to support him remains unclear.
Giorgio Cafiero is the CEO of Gulf State Analytics
Follow him on X: @GiorgioCafiero
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
Ukraine is heading into 2027 with a rising fiscal gap. Growth forecasts have been cut, inflation is rising, and the need for external financing seems to just keep going up. The economy is being squeezed by a labor market drained by mobilization and emigration, energy infrastructure has been decimated, and
Washington, DC - The midterm elections in the United States are in full swing, with early voting starting in most states.
The results will set the tone of US foreign and domestic policy for the rest of President Donald Trump's term. Control of both chambers of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives - is at stake.
If the Democrats flip one of the two chambers, which are currently under the control of Trump's Republican Party, they can thwart Trump's legislative agenda.
And if they can gain control of the Senate, they can block his judicial nominees. The upper chamber is also responsible for confirming cabinet appointees, ratifying treaties and holding impeachment trials.
There are 35 seats in the 100-member chamber up for grabs in this year's election, which will conclude on 3 November.
The current makeup of the Senate is now 53-47, so the Democrats need to flip four seats without losing any to reclaim the majority in the legislative body.
In most Senate races, the results are all but known before the votes are cast due to the political makeup of the states where the contests are playing out.
Barring a miracle, Republicans will win in Alabama, and Democrats will win in Massachusetts. That leaves a handful of competitive states that will determine the fate of the Senate.
The New Arab looks at the candidates in five key close races and where they stand on the issues.
The Senate contest in Michigan is one of the most closely watched races in the election. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, is taking on Mike Rogers, a Trump-backed former Congress member.
In recent weeks, Rogers and his allies have tried to focus the race on El-Sayed's Muslim identity, smearing him with baseless accusations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran.
Trump has repeatedly mocked El-Sayed's name. "His name is actually Abduladadalalala. It's Adulbabababababa Mohammed Al-Sayed," the US president said at a rally last week.
El-Sayed has pushed to refocus the race on the issues - particularly the affordability crisis, tariffs and the rise in the price of gasoline linked to the Iran war and his support for universal healthcare.
The progressive Democrat opposes US aid to Israel and argues that Washington should focus on investing in communities at home.
He has accused Israel of carrying out a genocide in Gaza - an allegation backed by leading human rights groups and United Nations investigators.
"I oppose the illegal and unjustifiable war in Iran and demand an immediate end to the hostilities," El-Sayed says on his platform.
Rogers initially supported the war with Iran, calling the decision to launch the conflict the "right thing to do".
But the former Republican legislator curbed his enthusiasm for the conflict as it dragged on and proved unpopular with voters. "The war with Iran needs to end, and end quickly," he said in a campaign ad in September.
Rogers is a staunch supporter of Israel. "When I get to the United States Senate, I will continue to unconditionally support Israel's right to defend itself," he said earlier this year.
In a sign that highlights the declining popularity of Republicans, Democrats are mounting a competitive Senate challenge in deep-red Texas, which has been a Republican stronghold for decades.
Public opinion polls have shown Democratic State Representative James Talarico neck-and-neck with Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Talarico has focused his campaign on fighting corruption, closing tax loopholes and lowering the cost of living. Paxton has presented himself as a defender of Trump's agenda, emphasising securing the southern border against irregular migration.
On foreign policy, Talarico calls for conditioning US aid to Israel. He broadly backs Israel's right to "defend itself", while focusing his criticism of Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"As a former teacher, seeing the death and the destruction in Gaza, seeing what’s happening to children in particular, makes me sick to my stomach," he said at a CNN townhall last week.
Talarico has stopped short of calling the atrocities a genocide, saying that the issue is a legal determination that should be made by international courts.
He has pledged to work to "end the forever war in Iran that’s driving up the cost of gas and groceries".
In contrast, Paxton has backed Trump's military action in Iran, but in a recently leaked audio recording he bemoaned the war's impact on gasoline and diesel prices.
"It's the war, it's gas prices, it's diesel," he said when asked about the issues dragging his campaign, according to Axios, which first reported on the leaked remarks.
Paxton is a strong supporter of Israel. As attorney general, he has defended and enforced laws to penalise companies and individuals that boycott Israel.
Maine generally leans Democratic in presidential elections, but Republican Susan Collins has won five consecutive elections in the northeastern state, earning her a reputation as one of the most tenacious politicians in the country.
This time, Democrats are hoping to use the mounting anger against Trump to finally topple the 73-year-old senator.
But the Democratic push was off to a terrible start after the party's nominee, Graham Platner, stepped down due to allegations of sexual misconduct.
Platner was replaced by former state Senate President Troy Jackson.
Collins, who has shown willingness to break with Trump, has promoted herself as an experienced and hardworking "common sense" leader.
Jackson has focused on his deep roots in the state as a former logger and supporter of workers' rights.
The Democrat agrees that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. "When I'm in the US Senate, I’ll never vote in favour of US taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel," he wrote in a social media post in July.
Collins is an unflinching advocate for Israel and has backed continuing military aid to the US ally, calling herself a "strong supporter" of the assistance, which totals at least $3.8 billion annually.
On Iran, the Maine senator has been a rare Republican dissenter against the conflict, voting repeatedly with Democrats to curb Trump's war powers.
Jackson, however, has argued that Collins' presence in the Senate tilts the balance in favour of Republicans and enables Trump's agenda, including the Iran war.
"Senator Susan Collins says that she voted against [the war] nine times, but she didn’t have the votes," Jackson said during a debate earlier this month.
"Well that sounds like then we probably ought to have Democrats in charge of the US Senate so that we have the votes."
Alaska is another traditional Republican stronghold where Democrats are making gains and hoping to stage a big surprise.
The race pits Trump-backed two-term senator Dan Sullivan against former Democratic Congresswoman Mary Peltola. The Democratic candidate's campaign slogan is "fish, family, freedom", focusing on lowering costs in Alaska.
Sullivan is running on his record of helping push large tax cuts and "historic investments" in the US military. The senator has voted consistently against Democratic efforts to restrict Trump's ability to continue the war with Iran.
Last week, he appeared to blame the Democrats' energy regulations for the rising fuel prices in an effort to defend the war with Iran.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the conflict in the Middle East is temporary. The true forever war is the national Democrats’ war against Alaska oil and gas and our jobs. That’s the forever war," he said, according to Alaska Public Media.
Peltola has been overtly critical of the war and Sullivan's votes in support of Trump's military campaign in Iran.
"This war is driving up our energy bills and hurting Alaskans with no end in sight," she said earlier this month.
Both Peltola and Sullivan are staunch Israel supporters. Sullivan has voted repeatedly on pro-Israel measures in Congress, including sponsoring a measure to deepen military cooperation with the US ally.
When she served in the House of Representatives between 2023 and 2025, Peltola was one of the most uncompromising pro-Israel Democrats.
In 2024, she joined Republicans in voting to ban then-President Joe Biden from withholding weapons from Israel. She backed a bill to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court in response to the arrest warrant against Netanyahu.
Former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is attempting to make a comeback in the Midwestern state that has been trending in Republicans' favour over the past decade.
He is taking on Jon Husted, who replaced Vice President JD Vance in the Senate after the Trump administration took office last year.
Beyond the single seat, the contest is of symbolic importance. It would restore the Democrats' competitive edge in the Midwestern state and serve as an early dig at Vance, who is expected to run for president in 2028.
Brown has made his opposition to the Iran war a key theme in his campaign.
"Jon Husted has voted 14 times to continue the reckless Iran war as gas and grocery prices continue to rise," he recently wrote in a social media post. "I’ll vote to end the war the first chance I get."
In March, Husted proclaimed that the war was going "much better than anyone thought it would".
But like other Republicans in competitive races, he has tempered his support for the conflict.
"The war needs to come to an end as quickly as possible so that we can lower gas prices," he told Politico earlier this month.
Husted and Brown are more closely aligned when it comes to Israel. Both are strong supporters of the US ally.
Ali Harb is a journalist based in Washington, DC. His work focuses on US foreign policy, elections, and Arab American communities
Follow him on X: @Harbpeace
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
For years, Serbia’s opposition has struggled to turn public discontent into a credible challenge to Aleksandar Vučić’s political dominance. On Sunday (25 October), a student-led movement that began with demands for accountability after a deadly train station collapse will attempt to do what established opposition forces have repeatedly failed to achieve: translate civic mobilisation into political change.
The upcoming parliamentary elections are about more than the (re)distribution of seats. They represent the endeavour citizens want and need in a democratic society.
For several years now, “the students operate according to the principles of direct democracy,” senior research associate at the University of Belgrade, Vasiljević told EUobserver. They gather in “plenums” and make collective decisions.
The motor behind that movement was anger. The lack of accountability after the collapse of a canopy at Novi Sad railway station on 1 November 2024, which killed 16 people was the main trigger.
Since then, protests have been taken place around in the country. Eventually, they grew into a nationwide challenge to the government. The student movement even marched from Belgrade to Brussels and Strasbourg to appeal to the EU institutions.
“It brought some irreversible changes that will have a lasting impact on society,” said Vasiljević.
And these changes could be now transposed into politics. “The country has been held captive for far too long by one ruling party and, in fact, one ruling elite,” Miloje Savić, a volunteering poll observer, told EUobserver.
For many Serbs, as for Savić, the students’ organisation represent “a tectonic shift in how society is organised and how it should function.”
The Student List, now the electoral vehicle for the mobilisation, has given people frustrated with established politics a new focus for their demands. The main idea being that political participation can be rebuilt from the ground up.
“It is not a good time to be living in Serbia. And during my life, I can’t remember a time when it was,” Ivan Bartoš, a 31-year-old organiser of student protests in Bački Petrovac told EUobserver.
Serbia, as many European countries, is suffering from an ageing population. It brings to the social debate a generational difference. On one side, the middle-aged and “corrupted” regime led by Vučić, on the other, a proposal of change without real political experience.
And the question that is heard in the run-up to the elections is “does Serbia need a professional politician who has been trained for years in kleptocracy, or is society willing to take a risk?”
Yet the movement’s rise has exposed a fundamental tension: society may be changing faster than the institutions through which change must be delivered.
“The institutions have been captured and controlled by the regime. There is not enough institutional space to accommodate these political changes,” Vasiljević said.
Previous Serbian elections have been accompanied by allegations of vote-buying, voter intimidation and ballot-box stuffing. After the last ones, held in December 2023, European MP’s called for “independent investigations into the irregularities”.
Knowing what is at stake, the Student List is trained an unprecedented number of poll monitors (15,000), seeking to protect the vote and document potential irregularities.
Attacks on opposition representatives by groups of unidentified men dressed in black have repeatedly raised concerns during the rule of Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).
The media are not safe either.
This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership
Login