Hunted by drones, stalked by snipers and surrounded by minefields, soldiers fighting in Ukraine can’t risk even a small lapse in concentration.

That is why Col. Dmytro Palisa, commander of Ukraine’s 33rd Mechanized Brigade, instructs his soldiers to ignore speculation about a possible cease-fire.

“They start relaxing, they start overthinking, putting on rose-colored glasses, thinking that tomorrow will be easier. No,” he said in an interview at a command post on the eastern front. “We shoot until we are given the order to stop.”

As diplomats thousands of miles away talk about a possible truce, Russia and Ukraine are engaged in bloody battles as intense as any of the war. The furious fighting, tearing across the Ukrainian front, is, in part, a late play for land and leverage in the talks, which the Trump administration says are making progress.

But it is also evidence of deep skepticism about the negotiations: Even if incremental steps such as a pause in violence on the Black Sea manage to take hold — few Ukrainian soldiers or civilians believe it would lead to a lasting peace. Both sides are still battling to establish better positions for future fighting.

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine says he believes Russia intends to launch new offensive operations “to put maximum pressure on Ukraine and then issue ultimatums from a position of strength,” as he put it last week.

Kyiv wants to deny Moscow that advantage.

Ukrainian forces remain outnumbered and outgunned — much as they have been since Russia launched its full-scale invasion more than three years ago. But they have largely halted Russian advances so far this year and are now engaged in localized counterattacks to claw back land.

Military analysts tracking battlefield developments confirm that the already glacial pace of Russian advances has largely stalled, even though Moscow’s forces continue to launch assaults along key parts of the front.

‘This war keeps changing the rules’

In interviews from the front line, Ukrainian soldiers and military leaders credited several factors for their resilience: New defensive strategies that more completely integrate drones, rapid adaptation to shifting threats, signs of Russian fatigue and improving morale under a new commander of ground forces, Gen. Mykhailo Drapatyi.

“This war keeps changing the rules,” Colonel Palisa said. “That means we constantly have to adapt. Every night, before going to sleep, we already have to plan an alternative strategy for tomorrow.”

The Ukrainian retreat from most of the Kursk region of Russia earlier this month promises to again reshape the contours of the fight. Tens of thousands of soldiers dedicated to Moscow’s seven-month campaign to retake Russian land there can now be redeployed.

Col. Oleh Hrudzevych, 35, deputy commander of Ukraine’s 43rd Mechanized Brigade, said that the Kursk campaign “really pulled a significant part of enemy forces” and firepower from other parts of the front.

For instance, he said, while battles raged in Kursk, there was a 50 percent drop in the number of aerial bombs — one of Russia’s most effective weapons — in the Kupiansk area on the northern edge of the eastern front, where he is deployed.

Russian forces, he said, have been limited to “mosquito bite” tactics — small assaults that generally end in failure. But he expects that Russia may now redirect some forces to his area.

Capt. Yurii Fedorenko, commander of the 429th Achilles Unmanned Systems Regiment, said that the main task along the northeastern part of the front was keeping Russian troops from expanding their small foothold on the Oskil River.

Unable to erect pontoon bridges because of the threat posed by Ukrainian drones and artillery, the Russian forces have been using small boats to ferry men and equipment across the river under the cover of bad weather.

Captain Fedorenko said that for nearly a month, Russian units had failed to expand their position and continued to pay a heavy price to hold the land they have.

“We conducted a drone flyover of a small tree line about 200 meters long and quite narrow,” he said. “In that one tree line alone, we counted around 190 enemy bodies.”

Drone footage shared by the Ukrainian military with The Times generally supports his account. But it was not possible to independently verify the precise number of Russian soldiers who were killed or injured, or to measure the Ukrainian losses over that same period of time.

Hundreds of miles away, on the banks of the Dnipro River on the southern front, the Russian forces are searching for weak points in the Ukrainian line.

Two months ago, Russian troops launched a series of cross-river assaults — using some 15 to 20 boats in each attack, soldiers said — but the effort failed.

Now, the Russian military is launching probing attacks, trying to press north along the river toward the city of Zaporizhzhia, which is under Ukrainian control. President Vladimir V. Putin and other Russian officials have said publicly that their goal is to fully control the city and the surrounding area.

But their plans to try to encircle Zaporizhzhia were put on hold when Russian troops were redirected to Kursk, said Sr. Sgt. Andrii Klymenko, who has been fighting in the area for many months. His claim was supported by analysts who track Russian military movements.

“Now they’re simply going to revive it,” he said.

A ‘Mad Max’ aesthetic

Much of the most ferocious fighting continues to be concentrated in the rolling hills and ruined industrial cities of the eastern Donbas region, where after three years Russia has failed to seize control of two coveted targets: the provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk.

Colonel Palisa oversees a stretch of Ukrainian defenses south of Pokrovsk, a city in Donetsk, where Russian offensive operations made the bulk of their progress last year.

But Colonel Palisa said that aggressive drone warfare and smart defensive tactics had, for now, blunted Russia’s advantages. “The enemy hasn’t advanced a single meter in this sector for the past three to four weeks,” he noted. “As of now, we can say that we have stabilized the situation.”

At the same time, he added, his forces have had to adjust to a growing threat: the proliferation of Russian drones tethered to ultrathin fiber-optic cables that render them immune to electronic jamming.

“When they didn’t have fiber optics, we could still move around,” he said. After the fiber-optic drones appeared, he said, his brigade lost some 10 vehicles in just seven days.

“That made me realize that we had to completely change our approach and abandon vehicles altogether,” he said.

Like their Russian counterparts, Ukrainian soldiers now frequently use quad bikes and buggies or move on foot. They often wear cloaks that mask a soldier’s heat signature from drones outfitted with thermal vision cameras.

Netting has been strung over critical supply roads, a simple but effective defense that Colonel Palisa said had cut successful enemy attacks by more than half. And soldiers now routinely carry shotguns along with their assault rifles.

It makes for a sort of ‘Mad Max’ aesthetic as tanks and armored vehicles mix with civilian cars, motorcycles and quad bikes retrofitted with cages and jammers.

The low-tech adaptations, along with a broad restructuring of the military, are strategies that Kyiv hopes will allow Ukraine to continue fighting — even as its primary military ally, the United States, pulls back support, increasingly repeats the Kremlin’s narrative and pressures Ukraine into cease-fire negotiations.

On the front line, any talk about a lasting peace still feels like a dangerous fantasy.

Soldiers say they believe that the fighting will continue until the price of war becomes too high for the Kremlin to bear and Ukraine is made strong enough to deter any future aggression.

“We are fighting for the right to live,” Captain Fedorenko said. “Americans must understand that this is not about pressuring Ukraine into some abstract peace. Such a peace is not possible — because Ukraine did not start this war.”

Olha Konovalova contributed reporting from eastern and southern Ukraine.

European leaders convened in Paris on Thursday in the latest meeting of the “coalition of the willing,” the countries who could help Ukraine fight Russia despite wavering American commitment and who could help safeguard an eventual peace.

France and Britain have been leading the gatherings, with a first meeting in Paris in February and a second in London this month. Top military chiefs have also held meetings. More than 30 officials were attending Thursday’s meeting — mainly European heads of state and government but also top European Union representatives.

Who is willing to do what in the coalition remains unclear, especially when low growth and high debt are complicating the equation for European countries trying to spend more on their militaries.

The biggest question surrounds the idea of a potential “reassurance force” of European troops stationed in Ukraine once the conflict ends to prevent Russia from repeating its 2022 invasion. Britain and France floated the idea, but so far no other country has committed troops to such a force, which is still largely undefined and which Russia has called unacceptable.

Speaking during a briefing with reporters on Thursday, Maria V. Zakharova, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, called such a mission “military intervention in Ukraine under the guise of a peacekeeping mission.”

“It could lead to a direct military clash between Russia and NATO,” Ms. Zakharova added.

French officials say the latest summit shows that efforts by President Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain to mount a joint European response are paying off.

“We are and will remain resolutely at Ukraine’s side,” Mr. Macron said at a news conference on Wednesday evening, after meeting in Paris with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. “The future of the European continent and our security are at stake.”

Mr. Zelensky said he was hoping for “strong new decisions” to emerge from Thursday’s gathering, where leaders were expected to discuss short-term military aid for Ukraine as well as efforts to support a future cease-fire and to bolster the Ukrainian Army.

Ukraine and its European allies have suggested that Russia is using United States-led cease-fire negotiations to extract concessions without giving much in return as the fighting continues.

In a statement released before Thursday’s meeting, Mr. Starmer’s office said that he would tell his counterparts that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia “has shown he’s not a serious player in these peace talks,” and that the Russian leader was making “hollow” promises.

“Now Putin needs to show he’s willing to play ball,” Mr. Starmer will say, according to the statement.

Mr. Starmer’s office said that over 200 military planners had gathered at the British military operational headquarters this week to discuss the “structure of any future force to ensure Ukraine can defend itself from future Russian aggression.”

The role the United States would be willing to play to support that force is also an open question.

President Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, called the idea of stationing a European force in Ukraine “simplistic” and “a posture and a pose” — even though the Trump administration has repeatedly berated Europe for doing too little to defend itself. Mr. Trump has not shown any willingness to provide American guarantees of Ukrainian security, which Mr. Starmer has said would be required for most European countries to consider committing troops.

Mr. Macron reiterated on Wednesday that any European force would not be on the front lines of the conflict and would not be tasked with monitoring or enforcing a cease-fire — a job that he suggested could fall to United Nations peacekeepers. Instead, he said, European troops would be based farther from the front lines, to deter Russia, and would help train and support Ukrainian forces.

“It’s a pacifist approach,” Mr. Macron said. “The only ones who would start a conflict or a belligerent situation would be the Russians if they decided to launch a new aggression.”

Mr. Zelensky echoed that, telling reporters, “No one wants to prolong this war and get another country involved.” A foreign contingent, he said, would “control the situation, monitor it, carry out joint training” and “prevent any desire by Russia to return with renewed waves of aggression.”

A senior official in the French presidency, who, in keeping with French practice, briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said that the European efforts to help Ukraine were “done transparently and in perfect harmony with our American partners, who are interested in this approach and have told us that it’s a good one.” Mr. Macron spoke to Mr. Trump by phone before Thursday’s meeting, the French presidency said.

The Trump administration’s sudden policy shifts and Europe’s urgent calls to spend more on defense are a vindication for Mr. Macron, who has argued since the beginning of his presidency that Europe needed more “strategic autonomy” and less dependence on American military support.

Still, the French official acknowledged that not all countries were willing or able to put troops on the ground.

Mark Landler contributed reporting from London; Ivan Nechepurenko from Tbilisi, Georgia; and Maria Varenikova from Kyiv, Ukraine.

South Korea’s largest wildfires on record blazed through the country’s southeast for a seventh day, with firefighters, soldiers and heritage workers racing to evacuate people and save ancient treasures from the encroaching flames.

At least 37,000 people were evacuated from their homes as the fires, which have left 27 people dead, spread in the dry and windy weather. The fires had burned over 88,000 acres of land, the biggest on record in South Korea, according to the Interior Ministry. The largest blaze in Euiseong County was only about halfway contained on Thursday.

Rescue crews were also focusing on saving as many relics and heritage buildings as possible after two 1,000-year-old Buddhist temples burned to the ground. Around two dozen buildings, trees, statues and other things with national heritage status have been lost to the flames so far, according to the Korea Heritage Service, the government body responsible for the conservation of national treasures and sites.

A statue of a seated Buddha from the early 9th century was reduced to ashes. And the base and branches of a 400-year-old tree considered the guardian of a local village were charred in the flames.

The heritage service said it deployed around 750 people across the region to protect or remove what still remains. The southeastern region is home to a large proportion of the more than 4,000 items on the country’s national heritage list.

In the city of Andong, firefighters and officials worked to protect UNESCO Heritage sites as the inferno threatened to spread to those locations. In the 600-year-old Hahoe folk village, firefighters hosed buildings as helicopters dropped buckets of water from above. Workers relocated signage from the Byeongsanseowon Confucian Academy, a tourist attraction.

While the government has successfully evacuated tens of thousands of residents across at least eight cities and counties, thousands of others have stayed behind. Many remained to protect their homes, businesses, livestock and pets. Local residents pleaded with firefighters to put out fires near their houses or restaurants.

One Andong resident said he and his wife were at home when their house caught fire. They had tried, but failed, to stop the fire by dousing it with water and were forced to evacuate. But they wanted to stay close to their house to protect their 22 cows, which survived, so they have been sleeping inside their car since Tuesday.

Earlier this week, strong winds kept helicopters and drones grounded, officials said. One pilot died when a helicopter crashed while fighting the fire, though officials have not disclosed the cause. Smoke and smog decreased road and air visibility, making driving and flying nearly impossible. The Interior Ministry said a lawn mower had started the first of the fires on Friday.

Conditions had improved by Thursday, and over 100 helicopters were deployed to the missions, according to the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasures Headquarters. At least one U.S. military helicopter joined the effort, the government said.

Emergency workers and residents are hoping the weather may turn in their favor, with light rain forecast for Thursday by the country’s meteorological agency. Government officials said this would do little to help put out the fires but could weaken the further spread of the flames.

President Trump’s unexpected plan to impose a 25 percent tariff on cars and car parts imported into the United States will not only disrupt supply chains. It will also fuel anger and alienation — and pressure to retaliate — among American allies across the globe.

Many of the countries most affected by the new levies, such as South Korea, Japan, Germany, Mexico and Canada, are already reeling from the Trump team’s disregard for free trade deals already signed and his threats to long-established security relationships.

Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada said on Wednesday that Trump’s move on tariffs was “a direct attack.” Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said the result would be “bad for businesses” and “worse for consumers.” Robert Habeck, Germany’s acting economics minister, said, “It is now important for the E.U. to respond decisively to the tariffs — it must be clear that we will not back down in the face of the U.S.”

Other leaders reacted in muted terms, hinting that they were still considering how to respond, with another round of tariffs, in addition to this one, expected in early April.

“We need to consider what’s best for Japan’s national interest,” Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba of Japan told Parliament on Thursday. “We’re putting all options on the table in considering the most effective response.”

The tariffs, which threaten both American and foreign carmakers, increase the likelihood of a global trade war. A chain reaction of economic nationalism with tariffs and other measures — perhaps adding costs for finance and services — could suppress economic growth globally, spread inflation and add rancor to already testy negotiations with Washington about security.

The Trump White House has sought to use every tool of American power, including its military support and consumer market, to extract what Mr. Trump sees as a better deal for Americans. But for countries that have spent decades trusting America and tying their economies and defense plans to Washington’s promises, this feels like a moment of reversal.

American influence, long built on pronouncements about values and the shared riches of free trade, has hardened into what many analysts describe as “all stick, no carrot.” In the Trump team’s thinking, critics argue, American gains require pain for others — friends included.

“Everything is a status competition or a dominance competition,” said Andrew Kydd, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin who incorporates psychology into studies of international relations. “I think this is characteristic of extremists of all stripes — everything is about exploitation and domination, and to think otherwise is to be blind or naïve.”

As a result, he added, other countries “have to take seriously the articulated goals, however alarming.” That includes threats to seize Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal, plus demands for economic submission to tariffs that weaken the economies of allies.

The European Union, which governs trade policies for its 27 member states, has been working for months on proposals for counter-tariffs if necessary. Those are designed to target areas of the United States that supported Mr. Trump in the last election. The United States is the E.U.’s largest trade partner, with nearly a trillion dollars of two-way trade last year, so new tariffs and counter-tariffs will have a dramatic impact on both sides, and sharply increase market uncertainty.

European Union officials have already announced plans to place new tariffs on many American goods — from lingerie to soy products — by mid-April, while lifting suspension of previous countermeasures imposed on earlier tariff fights over steel and aluminum.

That first wave, meant to hit American whiskey and motorcycles, was delayed to allow for more negotiations and over fears of a stark American response that could crush European wine and Champagne exports.

More potent measures are now likely to follow.

Ms. von der Leyen said late Wednesday that the European Union would “continue to seek negotiated solutions, while safeguarding its economic interests.”

European countries, especially Germany, export many more cars to the United States than they import. Anger about this disparity has been a regular theme for Mr. Trump since the 1980s, long before he went into politics, when he often complained about the numbers of German and Japanese cars on American streets.

The United States is the most important export market for Germany’s auto industry, and the largest three German carmakers make up about 73 percent of the European Union’s automotive exports to the United States.

Armin Laschet, a conservative who may become Germany’s next foreign minister, said a robust response to the tariffs must come from the European Union.

Canadian officials — with an election weeks away — have issued a similar call for action. On Wednesday, Mr. Carney’s campaign brought him to the bridge at the border with Detroit over which $300 million worth of auto parts cross daily. He unveiled a series of promises for the auto industry including a two billion Canadian dollar ($1.4 billion) fund to reshape it for a future without the United States.

“We will defend our workers, we will defend our companies, we will defend our country, and we will defend it together,” he said.

In Asia, officials had hoped for softer tariff treatment based on factories already being built in the United States at great expense. “We invest in America, employ people, and pay the highest wages,” Mr. Ishiba, the Japanese prime minister, said.

And yet, at a moment when economic and military threats seem to be converging for Japan, analysts said his hands were tied: Because inflation is rising with a weakened Japanese yen, Japan cannot afford a trade spat that drives up consumer prices even further. And with a more militarized China on Japan’s doorstep, sending armed ships to assert its claims to disputed islands in recent days, the prime minister is most keen to get a clear commitment from Mr. Trump to defend Japan’s security. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to arrive in Tokyo this week.

So far, the Trump administration has sent conflicting signals to America’s largest Asian ally. While Secretary of State Marco Rubio has reaffirmed support for Japan, the president himself has publicly questioned the two nations’ security alliance.

“We are very much constrained at this moment,” said Ken Jimbo, a professor of international politics and security at Keio University.

South Korea finds itself in a similar position; it has deepened its diplomatic and military dependence on the United States in recent years, as anti-Chinese sentiment rose among its people, and to strengthen deterrence against North Korea.

South Koreans’ fundamental trust in the alliance will survive the latest tariffs, in part because the penalties didn’t target South Korea only but also hit competitors, said Park Won-gon, an expert in South Korea-U.S. relations at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.

But cars are one of South Korea’s biggest export items, totaling $71 billion last year, and the United States was the destination for nearly half. The government called for a meeting with the car industry on Thursday to discuss a response to the tariffs.

“The U.S. tariffs are expected to pose significant challenges for our automobile companies exporting a large volume to the U.S. market,” said Ahn Duk-geun, South Korea’s trade minister.

On news portals from the left and right, many Koreans expressed outrage that the tariffs were landing just a few days after Hyundai Motor, a South Korean conglomerate, said it would invest $21 billion to expand manufacturing in the United States.

William Choong, a senior fellow at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, said that for many Asian allies, it feels as if the United States is a police commander “that sticks his Glock down the back of the junior cop — i.e. regional countries — and starts shaking him down for cash and other valuables.”

Ian Austen contributed reporting from Windsor, Ontario; Choe Sang-Hun from Seoul; Martin Fackler from Tokyo; Emiliano Rodríguez Mega from Mexico City, Mexico; Jeanna Smialek from Brussels; and Melissa Eddy and Christopher F. Schuetze from Berlin.

South Sudan’s Vice President Riek Machar has been placed under house arrest, according to his party, amid escalating tensions in the world’s youngest country that the United Nations has warned have pushed the country to the brink of civil war.

Mr. Machar was detained late on Wednesday by the National Security Service, his acting press secretary, Puok Both Baluang, said. The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement In Opposition, Mr. Machar’s political party, said the country’s defense minister and the chief of national security “forcefully entered” Mr. Machar’s residence alongside an armed convoy, disarmed his bodyguards and “delivered an arrest warrant to him under unclear charges.”

Mr. Machar and his wife, Angelina Teny, who is also the minister of interior, were placed under house arrest, the party’s deputy leader, Oyet Nathaniel Pierino, said in a statement. All of Mr. Machar’s aides and protection officers “were arrested and moved to separate locations,” he added.

The arrest threatens the fragile peace agreement signed in 2018 between Mr. Machar and President Salva Kiir, which ended a five-year civil war that killed nearly 400,000 people.

Mr. Pierino said that the vice president’s detention effectively killed the peace deal. Another senior party official, Reath Muoch Tang, called it a “blatant violation of the Constitution.” In a statement posted on social media, adding that arresting Mr. Machar “without due process undermines the rule of law and threatens the stability of the nation.”

The U.S. State Department said it was concerned about reports that Mr. Machar was “under house arrest” and, in a post on social media, called on President Kiir “to reverse this action & prevent further escalation of the situation.”

Both the United States and Britain said they would reduce staffing at their embassies in South Sudan because of the increasing insecurity in the country.

The U.N. mission in South Sudan said in a statement that Mr. Machar’s detention risked “returning the country into a state of war,” adding, “This will not only devastate South Sudan but also affect the entire region.”

The 2018 peace deal demilitarized the capital, Juba, created a power-sharing agreement between the country’s largest ethnic groups, Mr. Kiir’s Dinka and Mr. Machar’s Nuer. It also set up measures to ensure both sides shared profits from oil exports.

But all of that has appeared to be coming undone in recent weeks, as deep-seated political and ethnic tensions flared up and forces allied with both sides clashed. The violence has displaced at least 50,000 people since February, the U.N. said, and at least 10,000 people have crossed the border into Ethiopia seeking safety.

On Wednesday, the United Nations said that South Sudan’s military and opposition forces have been clashing just south and west of the capital in recent days.

Last month, Mr. Machar’s political party accused the authorities of persecuting its supporters and arresting some of the vice president’s close associates, including the deputy army chief, Gen. Gabriel Duop Lam, and the petroleum minister, Puot Kang Chol. At least 22 political and military leaders connected to Mr. Machar have been detained in recent weeks, with the whereabouts of some of them still unknown, Human Rights Watch has said.

In the Upper Nile State in the northeast of the country, South Sudan’s national army has also clashed with an armed force believed to be allied with Mr. Machar. This month, a U.N. helicopter evacuating wounded soldiers from the state was attacked, leading to the death of one crew member and several military officers, including a general.

Mr. Machar’s detention came just days after he wrote a strongly worded letter to the United Nations and African Union expressing concern over the deployment of Ugandan troops in the country. Their presence, he said, violated the peace deal. Uganda’s defense minister, Jacob Oboth, told parliament last week that Mr. Kiir had asked for the Ugandan troops to be deployed.

President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda has been a longtime ally of Mr. Kiir. Uganda is worried that a large-scale conflict in the neighboring country could result in a surge of refugees crossing the border and wider regional instability.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition enacted legislation on Thursday that handed politicians more control over picking judges, part of a contentious effort to overhaul the Israeli judiciary that roiled the country before the war with Hamas.

Israel’s 120-seat Parliament passed two laws after an hourslong overnight debate, in a vote mostly boycotted by the opposition. The legislation revamps the committee that picks judges, including Supreme Court justices, in a way that critics say will politicize the bench.

The law marked the resumption of a two-year effort by Mr. Netanyahu’s coalition to expand its control over other branches of government. Before the Hamas-led attack in October 2023 started the war in Gaza, Mr. Netanyahu had attempted similar legislation in the face of mass protests. He suspended the push to preserve wartime unity.

Now, Mr. Netanyahu has returned to the judicial overhaul, along with simultaneous efforts to weaken other state watchdogs. He is trying to fire both the attorney general and the head of the domestic intelligence service.

The laws that passed on Thursday were less far-reaching than the coalition’s initial proposals. But they nonetheless threatened to reignite the uproar that swept the country before the war, even as Israel and Hamas are engaging in new fighting in Gaza.

Crowds of protesters rallied outside the Parliament in Jerusalem on Wednesday to demonstrate against the legislation, waving Israeli flags. But in a sign of how the war has split the priorities of Mr. Netanyahu’s opponents, many also showed up carrying signs calling for an immediate deal with Hamas to free the remaining hostages in Gaza.

Inside the Parliament building, Mr. Netanyahu gave a fiery address in which he contended that his government’s policies would serve as a long-needed corrective to an unelected “deep state,” echoing rhetoric used by President Trump.

“Democracy is not in danger. The rule of bureaucrats is in danger,” Mr. Netanyahu told lawmakers. “The deep state is in danger.”

Unlike in the United States, in Israel a single nine-member committee is empowered by law to appoint judges, including Supreme Court justices. In a policy designed to ensure judicial independence, five of them were either current Supreme Court justices or expert lawyers from the Israeli bar association. The remaining four were politicians representing both the coalition and the opposition.

But Mr. Netanyahu’s coalition has long wanted to give itself more power on the committee, which would allow it to shape the next generation of judges. Yariv Levin, the justice minister who planned the overhaul, originally proposed a law that would effectively allow the coalition to dominate the committee.

Opponents said that granting the ruling coalition greater influence in picking judges who review its legislation would remove one of Israel’s few checks on executive power. Israel is a highly centralized state without a formal constitution.

Mr. Levin has framed the legislation that passed on Thursday as a compromise that did not go as far as the government’s critics had initially feared. Under the new system, political appointees — one from the coalition and one from the opposition — would replace the two experts from the Israeli bar.

And unlike before, when a supermajority of seven was required to pick a new Supreme Court justice, the legislation enacted on Thursday only a requires a simple majority — giving more leeway to politicians and their appointees.

Yedidia Stern, a law professor who has sought to mediate a middle ground on the overhaul, said the changes would still politicize the process of picking judges and would encourage the selection of more extreme justices to the Supreme Court.

Politicians and their representatives will now control six seats on the nine-member committee, meaning that the selection of justices would likely become a matter of political horse-trading, he said.

He argued that by engaging in so many divisive actions at once, Mr. Netanyahu’s coalition was seeking to overwhelm an already war-weary and distracted Israeli public, in an attempt to dispel an effective response.

“They have managed to exploit the war — and the energy it has drained from the public — to create tectonic changes in Israeli democracy,” he said. “I don’t think we can say that Israel is no longer democratic. But if this goes through, it will be a far weaker democracy.”

Thursday’s legislation is one in a series of moves by the Israeli government that critics view as attempts by Mr. Netanyahu and his allies to cement their power.

Last week, Mr. Netanyahu dismissed Ronen Bar, the head of the country’s Shin Bet security service, saying he no longer trusted him. Under Mr. Bar’s direction, the Shin Bet has been involved in probing potential Qatari interference in Israeli decision-making, including inside Mr. Netanyahu’s own office.

Just a few days later, the Israeli government effectively began the process of dismissing Gali Baharav-Miara, Israel’s attorney general. Ms. Baharav-Miara had frequently clashed with Mr. Netanyahu on policy.

She also oversees the country’s prosecutors, including those who are currently trying Mr. Netanyahu for corruption. Mr. Netanyahu’s critics have noted that a new attorney general could suspend or even cancel his trial. The prime minister denies wrongdoing.

A submarine carrying Russian tourists sank off Egypt’s Red Sea coast on Thursday, leaving at least four people dead and rescue workers scrambling to pull people out of the water, according to the Russian Embassy in Egypt and local news reports.

The vessel was believed to be carrying about 45 people on a tour of the coral reef off the coast near Hurghada, a popular resort city nearly 300 miles southeast of Cairo.

The Russian Embassy said in a statement on social media that four Russian tourists had died. Local news outlets reported that at least six people were dead, but the numbers could not immediately be verified.

Nine people were injured and were taken to a nearby hospital, and rescue workers pulled 29 people out of the water, news reports said.

The vessel was less than a mile from the shore when it sank at around 10 a.m. local time, the Russian Embassy said. The submarine is owned by the Sindbad resort, according to the embassy. Recreational submarines are popular among tour operators along the strip of vacation towns and resorts for exploring the area’s colorful coral reefs.

The Sindbad resort owns two submarines that are able to dive about 25 meters, or 82 feet, underwater, according to the resort’s website, but the vessels did not appear on a search of the website later in the day. The vessels can seat 44 tourists, along with two crew members for its tours.

Staff members who responded to calls to the resort’s front desk said that the vessel belonged to the resort, but declined to provide their names. The hotel did not respond to requests for comment.

The tour was organized by Biblio Globus Egypt Tours, the Russian Embassy said. The company, which is based in Hurghada, according to records form the Egyptian Travel Agents Association, could not be reached and its website was down.

Egypt has a history of problems involving tourist boats. Britain’s Maritime Accident Investigation Branch warned visitors of the poor safety records of touring vessels on the Red Sea in the area after three accidents in less than two years.

Over the last five years there have been 16 accidents, resulting in several deaths, the government agency said last month. The vessels were often poorly constructed with substandard emergency routes or run by operators who are not properly trained to respond in emergency situations.

Last November, four people died when a boat carrying 44 passengers sank during a six-day diving trip from Marsa Alam, another Red Sea resort. The trip was supposed to end in Hurghada.