President Ilham Aliyev: “The Zangezur Corridor, or TRIPP, will be an important transportation link connecting the continents.” pic.twitter.com/fCU0Q7NYxQ
— Ilham Aliyev (@presidentaz) August 27, 2025
Day: August 27, 2025
Mossad, Cohen, and U.S. Elections g.co/gemini/share/901a400712…
No Direct Evidence of Mossad Interference in 2016 and 2024 U.S. Elections, but Questions Linger Over 2016 Contacts
No Direct Evidence of Mossad Interference in 2016 and 2024 U.S. Elections, but Questions Linger Over 2016 Contacts
There is no direct, publicly available evidence to suggest that Yossi Cohen, as the former head of Mossad, or the Israeli intelligence agency itself, interfered in the American presidential elections of 2016 or 2024. However, reports following the 2016 election have detailed contacts between Israeli officials and the Trump campaign that have drawn scrutiny, while the 2024 election cycle has seen no credible allegations of similar activities.
Yossi Cohen served as the director of Mossad from January 2016 to June 2021, a period that encompassed the entirety of the 2016 U.S. presidential election and its aftermath.1
The 2016 Election: Post-Election Meetings and Unverified Allegations
Following Donald Trump’s victory in November 2016, Yossi Cohen, along with other senior Israeli officials, met with members of the Trump transition team.2 These meetings, which included discussions with then-National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, reportedly focused on key policy areas of mutual concern, such as Iran’s nuclear program, the Syrian civil war, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such meetings between intelligence chiefs of allied nations and an incoming administration are not uncommon and are generally considered part of the routine process of ensuring continuity and establishing working relationships.
However, more serious allegations regarding Israeli actions during the 2016 campaign have been raised. Investigative journalist James Bamford, in his book “Spyfail,” alleged that the Israeli government, under then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, dispatched a secret agent to offer intelligence assistance to the Trump campaign.3 According to Bamford, who cited FBI documents, this offer was intended to help Donald Trump win the presidency. While these claims are significant, they do not specifically name Yossi Cohen as being directly involved in this alleged operation. As the head of Mossad at the time, questions about his awareness or potential involvement would naturally arise, but no definitive proof has been presented to the public.
It is important to note that the extensive U.S. intelligence community assessment of foreign interference in the 2016 election primarily focused on the activities of Russia.4
The 2024 Election: A Different Landscape
In the context of the 2024 American presidential election, there have been no credible reports or allegations linking Yossi Cohen or Mossad to any attempts to influence the outcome. Cohen, who is no longer the head of Mossad, has been more visible in the public sphere, often commenting on regional security matters and Israeli politics, including his own potential political aspirations.5
Discussions involving Cohen in the lead-up to the 2024 election have centered on the potential implications of the election’s outcome for Israel and the Middle East.6 These are forward-looking analyses and do not constitute evidence of interference.
In conclusion, while the official interactions between Yossi Cohen and the incoming Trump administration in late 2016 and early 2017 are a matter of public record, the more serious allegations of an Israeli intelligence offer to the Trump campaign remain uncorroborated in the public domain and do not directly implicate Cohen. For the 2024 election, there is a lack of any similar claims of interference involving the former Mossad chief or the agency he once led.
Yossi Cohen’s Role in Trump Administration g.co/gemini/share/2de9d8efa7…
Yossi Cohen, former head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency, engaged with Donald Trump’s transition team after the 2016 election and played a significant role in a key foreign policy initiative of the Trump administration during the 2020 election year.1 However, there is no public evidence to suggest he had a direct role in either of Trump’s presidential campaigns.
Yossi Cohen, former head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency, engaged with Donald Trump’s transition team after the 2016 election and played a significant role in a key foreign policy initiative of the Trump administration during the 2020 election year.1 However, there is no public evidence to suggest he had a direct role in either of Trump’s presidential campaigns.
In late 2016, following Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election, Yossi Cohen, in his capacity as the Director of Mossad, met with members of the President-elect’s transition team. These meetings, reportedly directed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, involved briefing the incoming administration on critical security issues. This interaction was part of the official engagement between the Israeli government and the new U.S. administration, focusing on intelligence and policy matters rather than campaign activities.
During the 2020 election year, Yossi Cohen was a central figure in the normalization of relations between Israel and several Arab nations, a diplomatic achievement known as the Abraham Accords.2 This initiative was a cornerstone of the Trump administration’s foreign policy in the Middle East. Cohen’s involvement included a notable visit to the United Arab Emirates following the announcement of the normalization agreement.3 While these efforts aligned with the Trump administration’s objectives and were highlighted as a major success during the election season, Cohen’s role was that of a foreign intelligence chief advancing his country’s interests in cooperation with the U.S. government, not as a participant in a political campaign.
Baku is set to host three major international dance events, spanning both classical and modern genres in early and late September, Azernews reports.
The post Baku in rhythm of modern and classical dance: three major global events set to take place first appeared on The South Caucasus News – SouthCaucasusNews.com.
The Expert Council on NGO Law, a body of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe, said in its August 25 opinion that the Georgian Dream–adopted Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) would cause “grave and unjustified” damage to civil society if implemented, calling for its repeal.
Georgian FARA, which the ruling party claims to have copy-pasted from the 1938 U.S. FARA, took effect in May, and Georgian authorities have already begun implementing FARA as the country’s Anti-Corruption Bureau targeted seven civil society groups with inspection notices. Suggesting their work could constitute “political activity,” the Bureau demanded explanations from NGOs for their failure to register under the law and warned of criminal liability. The organizations, in response, say FARA does not apply to them, refusing to register as “agents.”
“In the circumstances, the implementation of the Act will cause grave and unjustified damage to civil society in Georgia, will be inconsistent with a wide range of commitments that this member state of the Council of Europe has undertaken and will thus be entirely inappropriate,” the Expert Council opinion concludes, after finding that GD’s FARA fails to meet any necessary conditions to restrict basic rights protected under the European Convention.
According to the opinion, the law affects several fundamental rights, including freedom of association, freedom of expression, and respect for private life. It stresses that restrictions on these rights “can only imposed where they are prescribed by law, have a legitimate aim and are necessary in a democratic society.” The opinion concludes that Georgian Dream’s FARA meets none of these conditions.
The opinion finds that “the requirements imposed by it [the Act] cannot be regarded as sufficiently prescribed by law,” that “there are serious doubts as to whether the adoption of at least some of the provisions in the Act can be regarded as having a legitimate aim,” and that “the implementation of the Act cannot be regarded as necessary in a democratic society.”
“The fact that the Act is an analogue of the US FARA is not in itself a reason to regard its provisions as necessary in a democratic society, not least since it has not been evaluated for compliance with the rights guaranteed by the ECHR,” the opinion says.
The opinion says the fact that the legislation can apply to CSOs with “no more than a supposed rather than actual agency relationship with a foreign principal” goes far beyond what is needed to limit external interference.
It adds that receiving foreign funding or drawing on outside expertise “cannot by itself indicate that they are pursuing the interests of a foreign principal,” adding that many governments also receive such foreign assistance, which does not mean they pursue the interests of international sources.
The opinion also says that the broad definition of a foreign political party could inhibit national minorities from “establishing and maintaining free and peaceful contacts across frontiers” or participating in international NGOs.
In addition, the opinion says the law’s demand for CSOs to file detailed statements of “each activity (including political activity)” goes far beyond what is needed to control foreign influence and amounts to an “unjustified restriction” of freedom of expression and an “unjustified interference” with the right to respect for private life.
On the requirement to disclose extensive information about organizations, including personal data on their directors, managers, and employees, the opinion says it is “beyond what is necessary in a democratic society” and exceeds any need to determine whether and to what extent a CSO is acting as an agent.
The opinion also voices broader concerns that CSOs would be effectively designated as foreign agents, even though no such label is formally attached to them. Falling under the law, “still amounts to signalling that the NGOs concerned are ones which carry out certain work or tasks on the orders, requests, etc. of those principals,” the opinion says.
It also criticizes the obligation for a CSO to keep accounts for all its activities even three years after ceasing “to be an agent for a foreign principal,” and for its director to remain responsible for filing documentation under the Act even after the CSO is dissolved, calling it “unduly burdensome” and of little value in preventing foreign interference.
Finally, the opinion warns against excessive penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of the law.
“Having regard to the inevitable effect of the Act’s provisions in precluding NGOs from seeking access to foreign support for the pursuit of objectives entirely consistent with European standards, the excessive obligations to disclose personal data, the unrestricted scope of the demands for supplementary information that can be made, the burdensome record-keeping required and excessive nature of the penalties that can be imposed, the measures contained in the Act are not ones that can be considered necessary in a democratic society,” the opinion reads.
The opinion calls for the law’s repeal.
Also Read:
The post Georgia’s FARA Would Cause ‘Grave and Unjustified’ Damage to Civil Society, CoE Body Warns first appeared on The South Caucasus News – SouthCaucasusNews.com.
