The Israeli political arena witnessed a dramatic shift with the announcement by former prime ministers, Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, of the launch of a new electoral alliance under the name 'Together We Win'. This move comes at a sensitive time, aiming to reorder the opposition's cards and form a united front capable of ending Benjamin Netanyahu's dominance in power.

Observers described this alliance as a 'political marriage' necessitated by circumstances, as both parties seek to bridge gaps in their popularity and confront the continuous rise of other competitors within the same camp. Through this step, Bennett aims to present himself as a right-wing leader acceptable to the center and left, thereby facilitating the attraction of undecided voters.

In his first statements following the alliance, Naftali Bennett affirmed his commitment to his right-wing identity and his rejection of relying on Arab parties to form any future government. He also stressed that his top priority would be holding those responsible for security failures accountable, pledging to form an official investigation committee into the events of October 7 immediately upon taking office.

For his part, Yair Lapid considered standing with Bennett a necessary step to rectify what he described as the deviation in the path of the Hebrew state. Lapid indicated in closed-door discussions that toppling Netanyahu requires presenting a figure with a right-wing background, which explains his concession of leadership of the list to his former partner in the 'government of change'.

Despite the momentum generated by the announcement, initial opinion polls conducted by media sources showed that the new alliance might lose four seats compared to the strength of the two parties individually. The biggest beneficiary of this decline appears to be General Gadi Eisenkot, whom a segment of voters sees as a more stable alternative with a clearer political vision.

Analyses suggest that one of the unannounced goals of the alliance is to exert intense pressure on Eisenkot to force him to join the list and accept Bennett's leadership. However, Eisenkot remains silent about his final position, content with blessing the move without making any commitments to join this new bloc.

Bennett and Lapid also seek to dispel the fears of anti-Netanyahu voters who dread a repeat of the 'Gantz scenario', where some fear Bennett's return to an alliance with the Likud after the elections. Lapid's presence in the alliance, with his firm rejection of sitting with Netanyahu, serves as a safety valve for this concerned segment of the public.

On the ruling right-wing camp, this alliance raises questions about the reaction of the far-right parties led by Ben Gvir and Smotrich. It is probable that this rapprochement in the opposition will push the current coalition parties to strengthen their technical unity to prevent wasted votes and ensure their continued hold on power.

Within the Palestinian interior, the alliance sparked mixed reactions among political leaders in the 48 territories, with MP Ahmad Tibi considering the move expected. Tibi affirmed that this development necessitates accelerating the rebuilding of the Joint List to ensure strong and influential Arab representation in the next Knesset.

In turn, Sami Abu Shehadeh launched a scathing attack on Bennett's discourse, describing it as extremist and dangerous towards the Arab community and its rights. Abu Shehadeh believed that betting on change from within the Zionist camp is a losing bet, emphasizing that Arab unity is the only way to reclaim rights and confront marginalization policies.

Experts believe that the success of this alliance depends on its ability to present a convincing 'shadow government' to the Israeli public, which is looking for charisma and experience. Netanyahu, despite all crises, still maintains the image of a 'magician' and an experienced leader in the eyes of a wide segment of Israelis, which makes the task difficult for the duo Bennett and Lapid.

The results of the ongoing war on the Gaza and Lebanon fronts play a crucial role in determining the fate of these alliances and Netanyahu's political future. If the military bleeding continues without achieving clear objectives, popular pressure could topple the current government before the scheduled elections, giving the opposition a golden opportunity.

Questions also arise about Netanyahu's health and its impact on the scene, with some believing that the recent revelation of his illness may pave the way for a tactical withdrawal. Should Netanyahu decide to resign, the political map would witness an earthquake that could reshuffle the cards away from the current 'Bennett-Lapid' alliance calculations.

Ultimately, the 'Together We Win' alliance will remain under scrutiny in the coming months, awaiting the outcome of field and political developments. This bloc will have to prove its ability to overcome the ideological contradictions between liberal secularism and religious Zionist right-wing to convince voters of its leadership capabilities.

On my first day as prime minister, we will form an official investigation committee into the events of October 7.

Recent human rights estimates and official statistics have revealed a tragic escalation in the human cost of the war waged by the United States and Israel on Iran, with the number of civilian casualties exceeding two thousand. International reports confirmed that this confrontation has resulted in one of the bloodiest disasters in the Middle East in recent years, with losses concentrated among the most vulnerable groups.

According to collected data, the majority of victims were not military personnel, but included children, women, paramedics, journalists, and civilian workers. These military operations began with a surprise attack on February 28, leading to significant confusion in counting and documentation due to continuous shelling and inaccessibility to some areas.

Figures released by health ministries and independent human rights organizations indicate that at least 2,100 civilians were killed directly as a result of the airstrikes. Sources explain that this number is likely to rise significantly as operations continue to retrieve victims from under the rubble of civilian buildings and service facilities targeted in several countries.

Inside Iran, human rights sources documented the killing of 1,701 civilians, representing a large portion of the total death toll, which has exceeded 3,400 people since the outbreak of the war. Local officials explained that about 45% of the total victims are ordinary civilians who were not involved in any military activity, reflecting the violence of the airstrikes.

In Lebanon, the Ministry of Health announced a heavy toll of 2,496 deaths due to continuous Israeli airstrikes since early March. The ministry indicated that approximately a quarter of these victims are women, children, and medical staff, highlighting the indiscriminate targeting of military objectives and densely populated civilian facilities.

The distribution of female victims included 503 deaths, among them 251 in Iran and 248 in Lebanon, in addition to four women in the occupied West Bank who died from missile shrapnel. These figures reflect the widening scope of the conflict to include a broad geographical area beyond the borders of countries directly involved in the armed conflict.

The childhood sector was the most affected, with 413 children killed in this war, 248 in Iran and 165 in Lebanon. Incidents of targeting schools and educational areas were repeated, leading to horrific massacres against students who were in their classrooms or engaged in sports activities in civilian facilities.

Journalistic and humanitarian work was not spared from targeting, as at least nine journalists were killed in raids targeting southern Lebanon and its major cities. Medical sources also recorded the killing of 91 workers from ambulance teams and the health sector, at a time when hospitals are suffering from complete exhaustion and a severe shortage of essential medical supplies.

On the other hand, Iranian missiles and drones caused civilian deaths in Israel and Gulf countries, with Israel recording 23 deaths. In the UAE, at least 10 people were killed, including migrant workers, in addition to reports of deaths and injuries in Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Bahrain due to missile interceptions.

Among the painful human stories, the incident of the killing of Lebanese paramedic Hassan Badawi stood out while he was performing his duty transporting an injured person in the town of Beit Yahoun. Badawi, a father of two, was one of dozens of paramedics who paid with their lives for their commitment to humanitarian work under intense shelling that did not differentiate between an ambulance and a military vehicle.

In Iran, the story of the child Raha Zirayi shook public opinion after she was killed in a raid targeting her elementary school in Hormozgan province. The raid, which resulted in the killing of 165 people, mostly children, occurred very shortly after the decision to close schools was issued, preventing parents from rescuing their children from under the rubble.

Migrant workers in the Gulf region also faced increased risks, as many were forced to continue working to earn a living despite security threats. Among them was Bangladeshi worker Saleh Ahmed, who was killed in Ajman by missile shrapnel while delivering water, leaving behind a family he had supported for a quarter of a century.

In the Lebanese city of Tyre, veteran journalist Ghada Al-Dayekh was killed under the rubble of her home after a distinguished career in radio work. Raids also targeted Al-Akhbar newspaper correspondent Amal Khalil and three other journalists near the town of Jezzine, despite clear signs indicating their journalistic identity and their vehicles designated for media work.

Field reports conclude by emphasizing that the effects of this war will not end with a ceasefire but will remain etched in the memory of the people through the stories of the victims. The transformation of civilians into fuel for this regional confrontation places the international community before its legal and moral responsibilities to protect civilian facilities, medical teams, and media personnel.

Civilians, including children, women, and paramedics, found themselves in the heart of a war that crossed borders to strike the stability of the entire region.

Leaked testimonies from soldiers in the Israeli occupation army have revealed horrific details concerning the commission of massacres and atrocities against Palestinian civilians during the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip. Press sources reported that these confessions included brutal practices such as premeditated killing and systematic looting, leading to psychological breakdowns and self-alienation among the forces participating in military operations.

Haaretz, the Hebrew newspaper, confirmed that a number of soldiers now feel shame and disgust at the actions they committed or witnessed in the field, which has led some of them to leave the country permanently or resign from military service. Reports clarified that these deep violations have left unhealing psychological scars, as these individuals suffer from a severe moral dilemma as a result of their participation in targeting innocent people and destroying infrastructure.

Mental health experts described this situation as a 'moral injury' that has begun to appear on a much wider scale than was recorded in previous wars, warning that it could turn into a real 'tsunami' threatening the military establishment. However, military censorship and Hebrew media continue to avoid publicly addressing this issue, fearing the collapse of the mental image promoted by the occupation for its army before the international community.

Sources quoted a reserve mental health officer questioning how these confessions could be reconciled with official claims that the army is 'the most moral in the world.' The officer indicated that acknowledging the extent of the crimes committed would necessarily lead to the collapse of the official narrative, which prompts the military leadership to deal with these crises in secret, away from the awareness of the Israeli public.

Testimonies included harsh incidents such as direct firing on unarmed civilians, humiliating mistreatment of Palestinian detainees, and widespread looting of citizens' property within the Strip. Reports confirmed that some soldiers involved in these massacres have already been admitted to psychiatric wards after their mental condition deteriorated, as they live in a conflict between their need for help and their fear of being branded as traitors.

Hebrew reports warned that ignoring these psychological crises could lead to a sharp increase in suicide rates among discharged soldiers, demanding that the Ministry of Defense and the army take responsibility for those they sent to the battlefields. The newspaper stressed the need to look directly at the true meanings of war and the failures and crimes it entails, which come at a high cost in lives and souls, holding the political leadership fully responsible for these orders.

In a related context, the occupation army continues its daily violations despite talks of ceasefire agreements, as it works to expand buffer zones and launch raids targeting areas it claims are safe. Military operations continue to destroy all vital sectors in Gaza, deepening the humanitarian crisis and confirming the occupation's insistence on completing plans for displacement and comprehensive destruction.

According to the latest statistics from the Ministry of Health, the number of Palestinian martyrs has risen to more than 72,587, while the number of injured has exceeded 172,587 since the start of the aggression. Data indicates that thousands of missing persons are still under the rubble, while the occupation continues to violate field understandings, leading to the fall of hundreds of additional martyrs even after the announced dates for calm.

If we publicly admit that a large number of soldiers suffer from moral injuries, how will that align with the image of an army that claims to be the most moral in the world?

From the very first moment of his inauguration on January 20, 2025, US President Donald Trump revealed the features of a new political era based on reshaping the landscape in Washington. Trump did not content himself with merely arranging the White House; instead, he moved towards building a network of influence that relies entirely on personal loyalty and proximity to the family circle, thereby bypassing the traditional decision-making centers he had often clashed with during his first term.

Trump's second administration is characterized by a notable presence of billionaires, media stars, and figures whose political rise is owed to their direct relationship with the President. This shift reflects Trump's desire to circumvent what he calls the 'deep state' and obstructive bureaucracy, by surrounding himself with individuals he trusts to implement his 'America First' vision without hesitation or complex institutional review.

Trump's family is no longer just moral support; it has become an integral part of the structure of influence and decision-making in Washington. Although some of them do not hold official positions, their influence passes through direct proximity to the President and the ability to manage sensitive files from behind the scenes, which sometimes gives them power exceeding the authority of official ministers.

Jared Kushner, the President's son-in-law, stands out as one of the most influential figures in Middle East affairs despite his absence from the official government structure. Informed sources confirm that Kushner acts as a back-channel communicator and undeclared advisor, leveraging his previous experience in leading the 'Abraham Accords' path to arrange strategic contacts with regional leaders.

In a move that drew widespread criticism, Trump appointed Charles Kushner, Jared's father, as the US Ambassador to France. This appointment comes despite Charles's controversial legal record, reinforcing the impression that family loyalty has become a criterion that supersedes traditional diplomatic considerations in the distribution of high-ranking positions.

Massad Boulos, the Lebanese-American businessman, entered the spotlight with his appointment as a senior advisor for Arab and Middle Eastern affairs. Boulos, who is related by marriage to the Trump family, has become the main link with political and financial elites in the Middle East and North Africa, building on his previous activity during the election campaign.

On the economic front, Trump granted businessmen central executive positions, transforming the 'private sector mindset' into a governmental approach. Howard Lutnick, former CEO of 'Cantor Fitzgerald,' took over the Ministry of Commerce to lead strict tariff policies, especially in the open trade confrontation with China.

At the Treasury Department, Trump enlisted Scott Bessent, founder of 'Key Square Group,' to be the link between the administration and financial markets. These appointments aim to reshape the relationship between the state and the business sector, with a focus on tax policies that serve Trump's protectionist economic vision.

The inclusion of Elon Musk in the administration, through the 'Government Efficiency Management' project, marked the peak of the intertwining of money and power. Although Musk's experience ended with his departure from the position months later due to sharp disagreements, it left a deep impact on how Trump attempted to dismantle the federal administrative apparatus and reduce expenses using confrontational methods.

Conservative media was not absent from the appointments scene, as Trump chose Pete Hegseth, a former Fox News anchor, to take over the Ministry of Defense portfolio. This choice sparked considerable controversy in military circles due to Hegseth's limited administrative experience, but Trump defended him as a voice representing the conservative popular base.

In a related context, Karoline Leavitt emerged as the youngest White House Press Secretary in history, representing the new media face of the administration. Leavitt's mission is not limited to conveying news; she works within a communication apparatus that seeks to bypass traditional media and focus on alternative platforms and influencers close to the President's views.

Supporters of this approach believe that Trump is carrying out a necessary 'revolution' to cleanse Washington of the stagnation and bureaucracy that hinder change. For them, relying on trusted individuals is the only way to ensure the implementation of the electoral program that millions voted for, away from the 'conspiracies' of permanent state employees.

Conversely, critics warn that prioritizing loyalty over expertise weakens American institutions and transforms the state into a private 'fiefdom.' The intertwining of financial and family interests with political decisions raises fundamental questions about transparency and accountability, making it difficult to separate the public interest from the interests of the narrow circle surrounding the President.

Trump's second administration represents an unprecedented test for the American political system and its balance of power. Between the speed of decision-making and the constant clash with existing structures, Washington today seems governed by the rhythm of one man, relying on a closed circle of allies to manage the affairs of the world's superpower.

Trump returned to the White House even more inclined to surround himself with people he considers loyal to his vision and capable of moving institutions in the direction he desires.

The results of the operational investigations conducted by the occupation army revealed new details about the military failure to confront the Palestinian resistance attack on Kibbutz 'Holit' on October 7, 2023. The investigations acknowledged that the field forces completely failed to protect the settlers, leading to the death of 13 people, including soldiers and settlers, and the capture of 6 others as prisoners to the Gaza Strip.

The report, based on field testimonies and video clips, confirmed that about 60 Palestinian resistance fighters managed to storm the kibbutz at exactly 6:59 AM after blowing up the eastern security fence. Despite the initial movements being detected, the military response was completely absent, leaving the kibbutz residents to face the attack alone for long hours without any external intervention.

Official documents revealed an incident described as 'fleeing the field,' where patrol vehicles arrived in the vicinity of the kibbutz at 7:18 AM but left the area after only two minutes. The soldiers justified their withdrawal by receiving reports of their commander being injured at another location, leaving the area completely clear for Hamas fighters to move freely between houses.

The investigation, led by Colonel Elon Peretz, indicated that the occupation army was never prepared for a large-scale attack launched by thousands of resistance fighters on dozens of locations simultaneously. This confusion led to a paralysis in the command and control system, as units that arrived later failed to coordinate their efforts or prevent the resistance fighters from advancing within the settlement.

In controversial details, the investigation stated that the first organized ground forces did not arrive in 'Holit' until 1:53 PM, more than seven and a half hours after the start of the incursion. This significant time delay gave the resistance fighters complete control over the area, enabling them to carry out their tasks and engage with advancing forces from a comfortable position.

The failure was not limited to ground forces but extended to the air force, as an attack helicopter arrived late and hovered for half an hour without success. The report clarified that the helicopter crew fired random shells in an attempt to reveal the locations of the resistance fighters, but failed to identify any target or provide actual assistance to the besieged forces on the ground.

The investigation claimed that some forces that tried to enter early faced simple technical obstacles that prevented their intervention, such as the main gate of the kibbutz not opening. An armored vehicle on its way to the location also broke down, reflecting a state of technical and operational laxity that affected the units deployed in the Gaza envelope during the first hours of the battle.

The findings emphasized that Palestinian resistance fighters showed a high ability to maneuver and hide, as intermittent clashes continued inside and around the kibbutz for up to 30 hours. Even after reinforcements from the 'Golani' Brigade and other units arrived, the resistance fighters continued to pose a direct threat, leading to the injury of several Israeli soldiers with varying degrees of severity.

Informed sources explained that the publication of these results was delayed for about six months due to the need to complete investigations at 40 other engagement points that occurred on that day. The purpose of this delay was to try to formulate operational conclusions that the army could use to rebuild its collapsed defensive system in the southern region.

The investigations included an explicit admission that the 'kibbutz security coordinator' and members of the 'civil defense squad' were killed while trying to fill the void left by the army. The results confirmed that the lack of coordination reached the extent of 'Golani' Brigade forces entering the area without informing other units, which almost led to friendly fire incidents.

The report also noted that a tank crew composed entirely of women eventually had to breach the closed gate to allow the rest of the forces to enter at 2 PM. These details reflect the extent of the chaos that prevailed in the field, where there were no clear orders or activated emergency plans to deal with the breach of the border fence.

In a related context, the investigation indicated that the resistance fighters who stormed 'Holit' were fully aware of the area's terrain and house distribution, enabling them to move effectively. Cameras documented the resistance fighters allowing an Israeli woman and her two children to return, a move the investigation considered part of the field battle management by the attackers.

The committee, whose findings were approved by former Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, concluded that the failure was comprehensive and not limited to a specific unit. It affirmed that the lessons learned require radical changes in how border settlements are protected, especially given the resistance's demonstrated ability to disrupt surveillance and rapid response systems.

It is worth noting that this investigation is part of a series of detailed investigations conducted by the occupation army into the events of October 7, in which about 1200 Israelis were killed. The army leadership faces significant public and political pressure due to these failures, which revealed unprecedented security and military vulnerabilities in the entity's history.

The Israeli army failed to defend Kibbutz Holit, primarily due to a lack of preparedness for a widespread and simultaneous attack.

The city of Modi'in witnessed an incident that sparked widespread controversy after Israeli police detained British-Israeli writer Alex Sinclair, on the grounds of wearing a religious kippah bearing the symbols of both the Israeli and Palestinian flags. Sources reported that the incident began inside a cafe where the writer usually worked, where he was verbally attacked by an individual who claimed that the kippah violated the law, leading to the immediate summoning of security forces to the scene.

Upon the arrival of the security force, officers informed Sinclair that the symbol he was wearing was illegal, which the writer vehemently denied, asserting that there was no legislative text preventing the combination of flags on clothing or religious symbols. The discussion quickly escalated into a field detention, where the writer was transferred to the police station under threat of physical force, and all his personal belongings, including his mobile phone and laptop, were confiscated.

Sinclair, 53, described the conditions of his detention as shocking and confusing, as he was placed in solitary confinement and denied access to water or communication with his family to inform them of his whereabouts. He indicated that this arbitrary measure continued for several hours without any clear legal justification or formal charges being brought against him, reflecting an escalation in dealing with political symbols that call for coexistence.

The kippah, the subject of the dispute, holds significant moral value for the writer, as he explained that he has been wearing it for nearly twenty years as an expression of his complex identity that combines religious affiliation and a political stance advocating for the recognition of the other. Sinclair considered the security elements' act of cutting the Palestinian flag from the kippah a blatant assault on a religious and personal symbol, and an overstepping of the powers granted to the police in dealing with citizens.

After the investigations concluded, Sinclair was released without any charges, but he was surprised upon receiving his belongings that the kippah had been deliberately damaged by cutting off the part bearing the Palestinian flag. The writer confirmed that the police did not provide any official explanation or receipt proving the confiscation or modification of his property, but rather he was asked to leave the station immediately without completing the legal procedures followed in such cases.

For its part, the Israeli police issued a brief statement acknowledging the incident, indicating that the measures taken against Sinclair fell under the category of 'clarifying the situation' before his release. Police sources avoided commenting on the direct accusations related to the destruction of the kippah or the ill-treatment the writer was subjected to during his detention in solitary confinement.

In a legal response, Alex Sinclair announced that he would file a formal complaint against the police force, accusing them of illegal detention and deliberate destruction of private property. Observers believe that this incident goes beyond being an isolated event, highlighting the increasing tensions within Israeli society towards Palestinian symbols, and the erosion of spaces for freedom of expression and the recognition of different political identities.

Destroying the kippah represents an infringement on a religious symbol of deep value, and what happened reflects broad issues related to the limits of freedom of expression.

International and local concerns have escalated over the fate of human heritage in Lebanon, following a series of Israeli airstrikes that targeted the vicinity of archaeological landmarks in the city of Tyre. This city is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, and it has been officially listed on UNESCO's World Heritage list since the 1980s.

Field sources reported that one of the violent strikes resulted in civilian casualties and the destruction of homes located within protected historical areas, causing direct and indirect damage to the archaeological infrastructure. These aggressions come at a time when these sites are supposed to enjoy strict international legal protection that prohibits their violation under any military circumstances.

UNESCO had previously announced the granting of 'Temporary Enhanced Protection' status to 39 cultural sites in Lebanon in response to urgent official requests. This list includes prominent landmarks in Baalbek and Tyre, in addition to the National Museum in Beirut and the archaeological site of Byblos, which dates back approximately 8,000 years.

In details of the aggressions, the 'Al-Bass' archaeological site in Tyre witnessed destruction affecting recently excavated artifacts due to the targeting of a neighboring house, and structures dating back to the Byzantine era were also damaged. The Lebanese Ministry of Culture condemned this behavior, describing it as a systematic aggression against cultural and civilizational heritage that represents the memory of peoples.

Tyre city hosts unique landmarks such as the Roman hippodrome, which is among the largest and best-preserved in the ancient Roman world. It also includes the famous 'Arch of Triumph' which represents a ceremonial entrance to the city dating back to the period of Emperor Hadrian, making its targeting an irreplaceable loss for human history.

For his part, Alwan Sharaf El-Din, Deputy Mayor of Tyre, confirmed that the city has been subjected to repeated aggressions since the 1982 occupation, noting that the occupation is not limited to destruction but also extends to theft. He explained that there is historical evidence of the transfer of stone sarcophagi and golden treasures from the region into the occupied territories during previous periods.

Sharaf El-Din pointed to Israeli attempts to obliterate Lebanese identity through false claims about the affiliation of some historical sites, such as Qalaat Shamaa (Shamaa Castle). This medieval castle was directly targeted, leading to extensive damage to large parts of it, as part of a policy of destroying defensive and historical landmarks.

These sites are subject to the 1954 Hague Convention, which obliges conflicting parties to protect cultural property and not use it for military purposes. However, field facts indicate a complete disregard for these laws, as shells and missiles fall very close to Roman columns and historical walls.

On the humanitarian front, the attacks caused a massive wave of displacement, as Tyre city received thousands of displaced people before it itself became a target for intense raids. In one of the recent massacres, the occupation targeted a residential neighborhood minutes before a ceasefire came into effect, leading to the martyrdom of 23 people under the rubble.

Search and rescue operations continue in the targeted areas amidst extreme difficulties, while Lebanese officials continue to issue distress calls to international organizations. Observers believe that international silence regarding the destruction of antiquities encourages the occupation to continue its 'scorched earth' policy that spares neither humans nor stones.

Archaeological sites in Tyre are not just tourist attractions, but rather civilizational symbols that have been successively inhabited by Phoenician, Hellenistic, Roman, and Islamic peoples. The destruction of these landmarks means erasing layers of human history that contributed to shaping the consciousness of the region and the world throughout the ages.

In Baalbek, the massive complex of Roman temples faces a similar danger, as the ground shakes under the weight of nearby explosions, threatening the collapse of sensitive stone structures. These temples are considered among the finest examples of Roman imperial architecture that have stood for thousands of years before this escalation.

Beirut's National Museum, which houses more than 100,000 artifacts, has also been placed under enhanced protection for fear of direct or indirect attack. The museum's collections document the region's history from the Stone Age to the Mamluk periods, making it a national and global treasure.

In conclusion, Lebanese heritage remains hostage to field developments, amidst continued Israeli violations of ceasefire agreements. Demands persist for effective international mechanisms to hold those responsible for the destruction of global cultural heritage accountable and to ensure that these civilizational crimes are not repeated.

Israel targets humans and stones, and seeks to destroy cultural and civilizational heritage and obliterate the historical identity of the region.

In the name of God, and with reliance on God, the Palestinian woman has decided to enter the municipal and local council elections with full vigor, activity, confidence, and capability; to stand side by side with men in serving the homeland and making decisions, supporting him and being supported by him, consulting him and being consulted by him, sharing opinions with him and having him share opinions with her, drawing strength from him and him drawing strength from her. It is true that Palestinian women had previously participated in elections in 1996, but this time we see them undertaking the experience with greater confidence, larger numbers, higher spirits, stronger determination, more mature experience, and more penetrating insight and vision for matters. With this electoral decision, she is trying to change the wrong societal concepts that have dominated it for long centuries, related to male dominance over administrative decisions, even in matters concerning women. Her candidacy in these elections is nothing but an attempt to restore society to its natural state, as God created it, a state in which male and female complement each other and are not superior to one another, cooperate and do not discriminate, complete each other and do not separate, to form a natural, integrated, and sound society as God intended since the beginning of creation, and as stated in the Book of God: "And that He created the two sexes, the male and the female." The Palestinian woman, with this electoral decision, is seen shattering the outdated myth that has lingered in the minds of the ignorant and backward, that women were created only for the home and children; to tell them with full confidence and reassurance that a woman is a mind before she is a body and a soul, and that she is a human being before she is a nurturer of children and generations. Like men, God has endowed her with intelligence, preparedness, capabilities, and competencies that qualify her to be alongside men in decision-making positions, to study and analyze, to decide and consult, and to defend the issues of her country and homeland as he defends, armed with her knowledge, certificates, struggle, and faith in herself and her cause. Today, by participating in municipal and local council elections, the Palestinian woman is telling Arab society in particular, and the world in general, that what governs the development and survival of society is knowledge and competencies, intellectual power and intelligence, not gender and physical strength; and that what works for the equality of male and female in rights and duties is the democratic system and respect for human beings, not the dictatorial system and dominance. After women throughout history have succeeded in being lawyers, doctors, researchers, scientists, poets, writers, physicists, chemists, and in other fields of science, especially in Palestine, she will undoubtedly succeed in being a mayor, a municipal council member, and a political decision-maker, as experience has shown that women everywhere are capable of sensing the issues of their society, capable of studying and analyzing them, and capable of articulating and defending them like their male counterparts; and for this reason, we have seen her reach the highest positions and ranks, from minister and director to researcher, scientist, doctor, lawyer, and professor, and so on. She is, without the slightest doubt, capable of being an active and influential member in any position she holds, adding to men and not detracting from them, supporting them and not diminishing their status, complementing them and not weakening them, and defending her country, society, cause, and homeland, and not standing by as a mere spectator or only suffering when she loses a brother, son, husband, father, relative, or friend. As sociologists say, two opinions are better than one, and this is what happens when the Palestinian woman takes her place in administrative centers alongside her brother, the man. The look of hope and optimism we saw in the pictures of the female candidates on the election list tells us that the Palestinian woman is determined to work, determined to succeed, and determined to occupy her leading role in society to no less extent than the man's determination; and that is with what she possesses of knowledge and competence, intelligence and shrewdness, experience and high confidence in God and in herself. So congratulations to the Palestinian woman for entering the elections, and congratulations to some for winning mayoralties, and congratulations to you for your self-confidence, and congratulations to you for your faith in your abilities, and congratulations to you for your insistence on proving yourself and serving your community, and blessed be your endeavor to reach the administrative pyramid and decision-making, supporting men in every position and place, and congratulations to Palestinian society for having you as a mother, sister, wife, struggler, mayor, and leader... and so on, from positions that were once exclusive to men, so that you may be a role model for all Arab and foreign girls. So go forth, and may God's eye watch over you, and forward, with our best wishes for you and all winners for all success and progress, and more prosperity in serving your country, people, society, and cause on the path to victory, liberation, and independence.

Seventy-eight years after its establishment, Israel, in the eyes of Palestinians, appears as an entity that has not yet settled on a definitive self-definition. It is not merely a state that has succeeded in establishing its existence, but a project that still fluctuates between contradictory forms, transforming from one stage to another without reaching a moment of balance. Therefore, looking at it today is inseparable from reading this profound transformation in its intellectual, political, and social structure.It can be said that Israel has transitioned, over these decades, from a socialist Zionism with a collective character to a biblical religious Zionism tending towards extremism and insularity. That initial Zionism, despite its hostility, cloaked itself in a modernist discourse and presented its project as part of the Western world and its values. Today, however, we are faced with a different discourse, more inward-looking, and more based on religious texts and historical interpretations that give the conflict an absolute character that does not accept compromises.This transformation was not merely superficial. Israel moved from a relatively open stance to a state of increasing insularity, and from accepting the idea of compromise – even if tactically – to adopting policies based on expansion and rejection. Compromise is no longer a central option; instead, it has been replaced by a vision based on imposing facts by force, and on redefining the conflict as an existential rather than merely political struggle.In the same context, Israel's image as the "exceptional victim" that cannot be touched has receded, gradually entering the sphere of criticism and accountability, and even prosecution in some international circles. The moral aura that surrounded it in its early days is no longer able to fully protect it, especially with the escalation of violence and expansion, and with the exposure of the contradiction between its discourse and its practices.As for the Jewish personality within this entity, there has been a remarkable transition from the inward-looking "Talmudic Jew," content with managing his private affairs, to the "Biblical Jew" who sees himself as an actor in history, tasked with control, expansion, and fighting. This shift reflects a transition from a state of defense to a state of offense, and from retreat to initiative, but at the same time, it opens the door to further clashes.Politically, Israel is no longer what it once was. Instead of institutions that set the general rhythm, we are now witnessing the rise of the individual and the leader, and a gradual decline in the weight of institutions. The democracy that has long been presented as a key feature is undergoing severe tests, with the growth of authoritarian tendencies and the rise of populist forces that tend towards decisive action rather than consensus.In terms of performance, sweeping military victories are no longer the dominant characteristic. Israel now engages in complex rounds, often ending in compromises or attempts to market a "victory narrative," rather than decisive victories on the battlefield. Moreover, the concept of absolute security control has eroded, replaced by a reality of multiple fronts and intertwined threats, making military superiority less capable of resolving the conflict.Socially, Israel has transitioned from a society aspiring to homogeneity to a multi-ethnic and multi-identity society suffering from increasing internal divisions. From the collectivism that characterized its beginnings to the individualism that dominates today, and from a solid national immunity to a state of internal fragmentation, reflecting the failure of the complete integration project.Most significantly, groups that were considered marginal or extremist are now at the heart of the scene; indeed, they are shaping policies and determining directions. This transformation is reshaping Israel from within, pushing it towards greater rigidity, and making "Third Israel" in the occupied West Bank an expression of this new path, where settlement is not just a policy, but an ideology.Despite all the successes Israel has achieved in economy, technology, and military power, it still suffers from a deep identity crisis. It has not yet been able to resolve the question: What does it want to be? A normal state in the region, or an exceptional project above it? This confusion is reflected in its policies, in its relationship with its neighbors, and in its dealings with Palestinians.At its core, it seems that its failure to reach a settlement with the Palestinians is not just a detail, but the knot that hinders its stability. Instead of leading to a review, this failure pushes it towards further extremism and violence, as if it is trying to escape forward.Thus, Israel today stands at a real crossroads. Its continuation on this path may lead to uncomfortable results, not only for Palestinians, but for itself as well. For states, no matter how powerful, cannot live long in a state of open conflict, nor can they establish their stability on the denial of the other.Therefore, the question is no longer just: How do Palestinians see it? But: Where is Israel itself heading, as it changes so rapidly, without finding a definitive point of reference?* Director of the Mediterranean Center for Regional Studies

Washington – Said Arikat – 27/4/2026

News Analysis

President Donald Trump's decision to cancel a trip that two of his senior aides were scheduled to make to Islamabad appeared to be a revealing moment for the faltering path between Washington and Tehran. The trip, prepared for a new round of talks on a potential agreement to end the war on Iran, was canceled hours before its departure, sending a political message that carried more than procedural significance, and confirming that negotiations are still far from any serious breakthrough so far.

Trump said he informed his team not to take "an eighteen-hour trip to sit and talk fruitlessly," adding that the United States "holds all the cards." This rhetoric summarizes the American president's philosophy in managing foreign crises, where negotiation is viewed as an extension of military and economic pressure, rather than an independent path for resolving complex disputes. In the Iranian case, this approach seems more complex and less effective than Washington imagines.

The American move also represented a second setback for Pakistani mediation in less than a week, after a visit expected from Vice President JD Vance to Islamabad was canceled. These developments reveal that the American administration has not given the Pakistani channel full political weight, despite Pakistan's open relations with Tehran and Washington, and its theoretical ability to facilitate communication between the two parties at a highly sensitive regional moment.

In contrast, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi returned to Islamabad hours after his departure, indicating that Tehran still sees Pakistani mediation as a viable avenue for investment, or at least a suitable arena for exchanging political messages before his move to Moscow. Iran usually keen to keep communication channels open, even at the peak of escalation, without showing signs of weakness or haste.

The most prominent obstacle to any negotiation is the continued American naval blockade on Iranian ports, a measure aimed at strangling the Iranian economy and pushing the leadership in Tehran to make concessions. However, Iran has repeatedly declared its refusal to negotiate under pressure, considering that any agreement extracted under coercion lacks political and sovereign legitimacy. Between the American desire to impose its conditions and the Iranian insistence on steadfastness, the path stumbles before it even begins.

This crisis is not separate from the escalating tension in the Strait of Hormuz, the vital passage for oil and gas exports from the Gulf. Both sides have continued to detain ships and accuse them of violating navigation restrictions, making the sea a parallel pressure arena to the negotiating table. Any limited incident in this region is capable of undermining months of communications and causing global energy prices to rise immediately.

The nuclear file remains the most complex issue. The dispute is not limited to the extent of enrichment or levels of control, but includes the principle of the right itself. Iran says the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty guarantees its right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, while Washington insists on preventing any capability that puts Tehran a short distance from producing a nuclear weapon. Thus, the dispute transforms from technical to sovereign and strategic at the same time.

The irony is that Trump is now negotiating a crisis he himself contributed to complicating when he withdrew in 2018 from the nuclear agreement signed in 2015. It is true that the previous agreement was not perfect, but it imposed strict restrictions and extensive inspection mechanisms. The unilateral American withdrawal weakened the pragmatic current within Iran, strengthened the arguments of hardliners who say Washington does not abide by its commitments, and then pushed Tehran to accelerate enrichment and expand its nuclear stockpile.

This background reveals the limits of the chronic American belief that sanctions and military force are sufficient to change the behavior of targeted countries. Pressures may weaken the economy, but they do not automatically produce political surrender; rather, they often reinforce defensive tendencies and give the authorities additional pretexts for rigidity. In the Iranian case, the more the external threat escalates, the more the opportunities for pragmatic currents diminish and the influence of security institutions expands.

Moreover, the decision-making style within the American administration raises additional questions. When visits and appointments are canceled at the last minute, mediators' trust in Washington's seriousness erodes, and it becomes difficult to build on its commitments. Diplomacy requires a stable partner whose behavior can be predicted, not an administration that swings between escalation and retreat depending on daily calculations or political mood.

In contrast, Tehran is betting on what it calls "long patience." It realizes that the American administration needs a quick achievement that can be marketed domestically, while Iran, despite the high cost, can endure a longer stalemate. Hence one of Iran's most important strengths: time. The longer the crisis lasts without a full-blown explosion, the more pressure there is on Washington to show some result.

However, this does not mean that Iran holds the full initiative. It faces an economy burdened by sanctions, internal social challenges, and escalating security pressures. Nevertheless, the Iranian leadership seems convinced that making major concessions under siege would be more costly than the possibility of the crisis continuing, especially in the absence of reliable American guarantees after the experiences of past years.

If the current logic of coercion continues, negotiations may turn into mere cover for managing the conflict rather than ending it. But if Washington realizes that force alone is not enough, an opportunity may arise for a gradual settlement based on reciprocal steps and partial lifting of sanctions in exchange for verifiable restrictions. The real question is no longer who wins a round of statements, but who has a viable vision that saves face for both sides.

So far, it seems Trump wants a quick deal through which he can declare his superiority over his predecessor Barack Obama, while Iran wants a deal that guarantees its interests and prevents a future American withdrawal. Between Washington's haste and Tehran's patience, the canceled Islamabad trip remains a symbol of a wide gap yet to be bridged, and a conflict that goes beyond individuals to a deep contradiction in understanding the meaning and limits of power.

First Prediction: Limited Interim Settlement

Experts believe that the most realistic probability for the future is reaching an interim agreement that does not address all issues, but rather freezes escalation and gives both parties additional time. This could include a partial easing of sanctions in exchange for halting some enrichment activities and expanding international oversight. This scenario suits Trump because it provides a quick achievement, and suits Iran because it gives it economic breathing room without major strategic concessions. But it will remain fragile and prone to collapse at the first sudden political or security crisis between the two sides later on.

The second scenario is the continuation of the current situation: indirect contacts, spaced-out negotiation rounds, and controlled escalation that does not slide into an all-out war. Washington will continue economic and military pressures, while Tehran continues to maneuver and gradually expand its regional and nuclear cards. This pattern may continue for months or years, as it allows both parties to avoid full concession or major confrontation. But it slowly accumulates risks, and makes any maritime or security incident a cause for an uncalculated explosion at any later moment.

If Trump insists on extreme conditions, or if Iran decides to raise the level of enrichment and regional challenge, negotiations may collapse entirely and the region return to the brink of direct confrontation. At that point, Washington may resort to limited strikes or tightening an even harsher blockade, while Tehran responds via the Strait of Hormuz or through its allies in the region. This scenario does not guarantee victory for any party, but rather raises the economic and security costs for everyone, and makes a return to diplomacy more difficult later on.

Large forces of the Israeli occupation army stormed Qalandia camp, located north of occupied Jerusalem, at dawn on Monday, where they began carrying out a widespread raid campaign that affected dozens of homes. Local sources reported that the raid was accompanied by a heavy deployment of infantry forces in the narrow alleys of the camp, amid intensive overflights by reconnaissance aircraft and the presence of military vehicles at the main entrances.

Video clips documented the occupation soldiers' assaults on citizens' property, showing soldiers violently kicking the doors of residential buildings and leading young men, with their hands tied, to unknown destinations. The sources stated that the arrest campaign targeted a number of citizens, among whom was the released prisoner Arafat Yaqoub, who was arrested after his home was raided and its contents were savagely ransacked.

In a remarkable field escalation, the occupation forces forcibly evacuated one of the residential homes in the camp, turning it into a military barracks and an observation point for their soldiers. This coincided with the army pushing additional military reinforcements from the Qalandia military checkpoint towards the depths of the camp, to secure the withdrawal of forces after completing the search and arrest operations that lasted for several hours.

These developments come just hours after a Palestinian youth was injured by live occupation fire near the separation wall north of occupied Jerusalem on Sunday evening. According to eyewitnesses, occupation soldiers fired directly at the youth, causing him injuries, in the context of targeting farmers and passersby near the border and separation areas.

Cities and camps in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem have witnessed an unprecedented escalation in the pace of incursions and assaults since October 2023, with night raids becoming a daily practice aimed at persecuting Palestinians. These incursions are usually accompanied by violent field confrontations, during which the occupation seeks to impose a new security reality by intensifying military presence in densely populated areas.

According to the latest official Palestinian data, occupation and settler attacks in the West Bank have resulted in the martyrdom of 1,154 Palestinians and the injury of approximately 11,750 others since the beginning of the recent escalation. The number of arrests has also risen to nearly 22,000 cases, amid difficult detention conditions faced by prisoners inside occupation prisons.

Occupation forces converted a house in the camp into a military barracks after forcing its residents to leave it under threat of arms.

Informed sources revealed that Tehran has submitted a new diplomatic proposal to the American administration through Pakistani intermediaries, aiming to end the ongoing dispute and reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation. This move comes at a sensitive time when the region is witnessing escalating military tensions and increasing economic pressures, with Iran seeking a comprehensive political solution to the current crisis.

The Iranian offer includes a fundamental clause to postpone discussions related to the nuclear program to a later stage, as part of a broader deal that ensures the stability of vital waterways. According to media reports, this step reflects Tehran's desire to separate outstanding issues and focus on halting military operations and lifting the naval blockade imposed on it as a top priority at present.

For his part, US President Donald Trump expressed conditional openness to the idea of negotiation, indicating that the door is open for the Iranian leadership to communicate if there is a genuine desire to end the war in which the United States and Israel have been involved. However, Trump reiterated his country's red lines, stressing that Tehran possessing nuclear weapons is not permissible under any circumstances.

In the context of intense diplomatic activity, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a series of discussions in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, despite the absence of the American negotiating delegation that was supposed to participate in indirect rounds. These meetings focused on informing the Pakistani side, as a key mediator, of the details of the Iranian conditions necessary to reach a permanent ceasefire agreement.

The Iranian demands conveyed by Araghchi include the drafting of a new international legal system regulating movement in the Strait of Hormuz, ensuring the rights of all parties and preventing future military friction. Tehran also demanded financial compensation for the damages it has incurred, in addition to strict international guarantees to prevent the recurrence of any aggression by countries it describes as instigators of the conflict.

Despite the direct negotiation track faltering after the cancellation of a visit by prominent American envoys to the region, Araghchi continued his tour, which included the Sultanate of Oman, emphasizing the role of regional mediators in bridging viewpoints. Diplomatic sources confirm that Iranian moves aim to build a political safety net that ensures the lifting of the naval blockade and the unimpeded flow of goods and services without military obstacles.

In a significant development, the Iranian Foreign Minister traveled to Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg, to discuss the repercussions of the stalled negotiations with Washington. The Kremlin confirmed this meeting, which aims to coordinate positions between the two allies, as Moscow seeks to play a more active role in promoting de-escalation efforts and reducing tensions in the Middle East.

The Iranian Ambassador to Moscow, Kazem Jalali, described this visit as part of a 'diplomatic jihad' to protect Iranian national interests in the face of escalating external threats. Jalali indicated that cooperation between Tehran and Moscow represents a united front aimed at breaking unipolarity and Western hegemony, stressing that consultations will also address ways to achieve a comprehensive ceasefire that ends the humanitarian suffering resulting from the war.

Iran can communicate if it wishes to negotiate an end to the war, but it cannot possess nuclear weapons.

The Gaza Strip received a new batch of wounded Palestinians who completed their treatment journeys abroad, where feelings of joy at their arrival mingled with the bitterness of the complex humanitarian reality witnessed in the Strip. The returnees insisted on returning to their homes despite the massive destruction and the loss of basic necessities of life, in a clear message of steadfastness on their land.

Sources reported that the journey was fraught with hardships and challenges, especially at the border crossings, which are subject to strict security measures. One of the returnees described her experience as extremely exhausting, while also noting the medical and humanitarian care she received in Egyptian hospitals during her treatment period.

Upon their arrival in Khan Yunis, the returnees found themselves facing a painful reality, as many of them were forced to go directly to the tents of shelter centers. This forced step comes after the occupation forces completely destroyed their homes during military operations that targeted residential areas in the Strip.

A returning woman recounted painful details about the loss of her son during his treatment journey, as he suffered a deterioration in his health before his death far from his homeland. Despite this loss, the woman affirmed that Gaza remains beautiful in the eyes of its people despite all the destruction it has suffered, expressing her hope for the start of the reconstruction phase soon.

For their part, other returnees spoke about being subjected to abusive practices by occupation soldiers during their crossing, including humiliating searches and confiscation of personal belongings. One young man confirmed that these procedures, including restrictions and long waits, did not prevent him from insisting on returning to Gaza, which he sees as his only option.

In an emotional scene, families welcomed their wounded children with tears of joy after an absence that lasted for years in some cases, with one returnee mentioning that he had been away from the Strip for about two and a half years. The families considered the safety of their children and their return to the family's embrace to be the greatest gain in these harsh circumstances.

This batch's return comes amid limited operation of the Rafah land crossing, which faces operational difficulties after long periods of closure that negatively affected the movement of patients. Thousands of wounded in Gaza face immense challenges in accessing necessary medical care due to the collapse of the local health system.

Field sources indicated that the occupation continues to exert security pressure on returnees by subjecting them to lengthy interrogations and harsh waiting conditions. These practices are considered part of the ongoing policy of tightening restrictions aimed at complicating the lives of Palestinians even after the cessation of direct military operations.

It is worth noting that the Gaza Strip is trying to recover from the effects of a devastating war that lasted for two years, resulting in tens of thousands of martyrs and wounded and unprecedented destruction of infrastructure. This reality has made travel for treatment an inevitable necessity for many cases for which treatment is not available in the destroyed hospitals.

Despite the ceasefire agreement coming into effect on October 10, 2025, Israeli violations continue to cast a shadow over the lives of the residents. The testimonies of the returning wounded reflect a popular determination to stay and adapt to the most difficult living conditions, preferring to live in tents rather than remain in exile.

Gaza remains beautiful despite its bitterness, and staying in a tent inside the Strip is still better than living outside it.

Obtaining a loaf of bread in the Gaza Strip is no longer just a routine daily detail; it has become a battle for survival that reflects the depth of the humanitarian tragedy experienced by more than 2.2 million Palestinians. This transformation from abundance to deadly scarcity embodies a complete collapse of the system that once ensured the minimum level of food security for the besieged population.

Field data indicates a huge gap in supplies, as the sector daily needs about 450 tons of flour to meet basic needs, while only scarce quantities not exceeding 200 tons are actually available. These figures practically mean that thousands of Palestinian families go to bed without their share of bread, turning the shortage into a permanent reality.

Before the recent escalation, Gaza relied on a sophisticated network of commercial and automated bakeries with high production capacity. Today, this network has sharply shrunk, with international reports indicating that only 9 bakeries are still operating out of 30 that were receiving direct support to provide bread at affordable prices.

The operating percentage of bakeries that have been able to resume production ranges between 30% and 50% at best, and they depend entirely on what the World Food Program provides in terms of flour and yeast. This sharp decline reflects the fragility of the productive infrastructure that was directly or indirectly targeted during the ongoing military operations.

The role of international organizations such as the World Food Program and the World Central Kitchen stands out as a key player in attempting to contain the disaster by distributing hundreds of thousands of meals daily. However, this role remains limited to crisis management without providing radical solutions, in light of the occupation's policy that adopts 'rationed relief' as a tool for control.

The model of precisely calculated external flows keeps the weapon of starvation present as a strategic option that can be activated at any closure of crossings or shortage of fuel. As soon as flour or energy runs out, the entire relief system stops, paving the way for the specter of famine to appear in various areas of the Strip.

The fuel and energy crisis is a crucial factor in disrupting the remaining productive capacities, as diesel prices recorded a record increase of 438%. This unprecedented rise has made operating automated ovens extremely costly and impractical in the absence of sustainable energy alternatives and the scarcity of cooking gas.

In addition to the fuel shortage, the dilemma of the absence of spare parts and equipment necessary for the maintenance of ovens damaged by shelling emerges. These factors combined have led to a crazy jump in bread prices, reaching 400%, which has put this basic commodity out of reach for a wide segment of the poor and displaced.

The crisis was not limited to a shortage of supply but extended to include a structural imbalance in distribution mechanisms and the emergence of patterns of monopoly and the black market. Local bakeries found themselves facing an impossible equation between exorbitant operating costs and the risk of direct targeting of workers and facilities in the field.

Automated bakeries that previously produced about 100,000 loaves daily are now operating at less than half their capacity at best. The absence of technical rehabilitation capacity and the shortage of raw materials have caused production to decline to minimum levels that do not meet the minimum of the increasing demand in shelters.

The health repercussions of this crisis are evident in the increasing cases of acute malnutrition, especially among children and pregnant women. More than 55% of the population has also resorted to using primitive and dangerous cooking methods, such as burning plastic and wood, which adds respiratory health risks to the suffering of hunger.

Economically, the bread crisis has caused the collapse of already fragile purchasing power and the loss of thousands of jobs in the bakery sector and related services. UN reports confirm that about 41% of the population has lost their stable access to food, portending a long-term social catastrophe.

Legally, this artificial crisis raises fundamental questions about the effectiveness of international humanitarian law, which prohibits the use of starvation as a method of warfare. The continued obstruction of food supplies puts the international community before a moral and legal test to fulfill its obligations towards civilians in besieged areas.

In conclusion, the bread crisis in Gaza remains a testament to a systematic policy of collective punishment that goes beyond mere resource scarcity to target human dignity. Ensuring the right to food is not just a relief demand, but a test of the world's ability to uphold its values in the 21st century.

Bread in Gaza is not just food; it has become a stark indicator of the limits of international justice and a weapon used by the occupation to ration relief.

The Palestinian Central Elections Commission announced on Sunday evening the official results of the local elections held in the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the city of Deir al-Balah in the Gaza Strip. Official data showed that the final voter turnout reached 53.4%, with more than half a million Palestinians exercising their right to vote at polling stations distributed across various governorates.

The electoral process witnessed sharp disparities in participation rates between regions, with the rate in Jerusalem Governorate reaching 43.9% covering only five local bodies, while the city of Hebron recorded one of the lowest voting rates at 30% despite its large electoral bloc. In contrast, results in 197 local bodies were decided by acclamation, raising questions about the decline of pluralism in population centers.

In a remarkable scene, the 97-year-old Palestinian elder Nader Shaaban insisted on going to the polling station in the village of Al-Jalama, north of Jenin, to cast his vote. Shaaban affirmed that his motive was to fulfill his national duty and support whoever he deemed most suitable to serve the community, despite his skepticism about the elections' ability to bring about radical change given the current reality.

On the ground, the city of Deir al-Balah in the Gaza Strip witnessed an electoral precedent with voting taking place in 12 centers for the first time in over two decades, where the participation rate reached 22.7%. The Elections Commission was forced to extend the voting period in the city by an additional hour to enable citizens to reach the ballot boxes amidst the exceptional circumstances.

In the city of Nablus, a state of dissatisfaction prevailed after the announcement of the victory of the Anan Al-Atira list by acclamation, which deprived about 89,000 voters of exercising their right to choose. Independent candidates accused Palestinian security forces of exerting pressure that prevented the completion of their competing lists, leading to the disruption of the democratic process in the city.

Academic Mohammad Dweikat explained that he filed an official appeal with the Elections Commission after candidates on his list were detained by the Preventive Security and General Intelligence agencies. Dweikat indicated that these summonses prevented him from registering the list on time, considering what happened a forced absence of real electoral competition.

The condition of 'recognition of the PLO's commitments' emerged as a major obstacle to broad participation, with political and religious forces considering it an exclusionary condition that contradicts the foundations of pluralism. This clause led to the boycott of the elections by influential factions, either by refraining from running or by calling on supporters not to go to the polls, which clearly affected the electoral momentum.

For his part, political analyst Akram Al-Natsha believed that the decline in turnout compared to the 2022 elections is also due to citizens' preoccupation with daily concerns and the escalation of occupation attacks. Al-Natsha added that the difficult economic conditions and high unemployment rates have made the electoral event a secondary issue for large segments of the Palestinian street.

The electoral process was not immune to Israeli occupation violations, as local sources reported that 6 citizens were injured during an Israeli occupation forces raid on a polling station in the city of Hebron. Al-Arroub refugee camp also witnessed clashes after the ballot boxes were closed, while settlers cut off roads leading to some villages around Jerusalem to obstruct voters' access.

In the context of political analysis, activist Omar Assaf considered that the condition of adhering to the organization's program empties the electoral process of its democratic essence and turns it into a mere formality. Assaf warned that the continuation of these policies would lead to a permanent abstention of citizens from participating in any future national or legislative entitlements.

Conversely, political science professor Ayman Yousef indicated that these conditions might be the result of international pressure aimed at ensuring the stability of the Palestinian political path after the October events. Yousef explained that the results of these elections will be an important indicator for the future of renewing the legitimacy of Palestinian institutions amidst the stalled reconciliation file between Fatah and Hamas.

Data indicates that the absence of elections in major cities such as Ramallah and Qalqilya reflects a crisis in forming lists and the ability to compete amidst sharp polarization. While Ramallah went for acclamation, Qalqilya completely failed to present any candidate list, which places local bodies before legal and administrative challenges in the next phase.

Despite the challenges, official sources considered that holding the elections at this time represents a message about the ability of Palestinian institutions to manage internal affairs. The Elections Commission affirmed that it worked according to the law to ensure the integrity of the process, despite all political and legal objections that accompanied the registration and voting stages.

The biggest challenge facing the elected local councils remains providing tangible services to citizens away from the political polarization that dominated the scene. The Palestinian citizen, as expressed by those who participated in the voting, awaits service programs that improve the reality of villages and cities and address the escalating economic challenges.

Corruption began long ago at the core of this state, and it reflected on its institutions, but we hope that the righteous will succeed in serving the people away from family considerations.

Medical sources in the Gaza Strip revealed today, Wednesday, a new and tragic update on the toll of victims of the ongoing aggression, as the numbers recorded an unprecedented rise in the number of martyrs and wounded. These statistics document the escalating humanitarian suffering since the start of the military escalation on October 7, 2023, amid a complete international silence regarding the daily massacres.

The sources reported that hospitals operating in various areas of the Strip received 17 martyrs and 32 injuries of varying severity during the past twenty-four hours. Official data clarified that among these victims, 13 citizens were killed in the last 24 hours alone, which confirms the continued targeting of residential areas inhabited by civilians without prior warning.

In a statistic reflecting the extent of destruction since last October, medical authorities recorded a total increase in martyrs during that period to 809 martyrs, while the number of wounded exceeded 2,267 injured. Medical staff are working under extremely harsh conditions with a severe shortage of essential supplies and medicines needed to save the lives of the injured who are flowing into the remaining shelters and hospitals.

Regarding field operations, civil defense teams were able to recover 761 bodies that were stuck under the rubble of destroyed buildings in several neighborhoods in the Gaza Strip. These teams face enormous challenges due to the lack of heavy equipment and fuel needed to operate machinery, which often makes the process of searching for survivors or recovering martyrs almost impossible.

Health authorities warned that the officially announced numbers do not include all actual victims, as hundreds of citizens are still missing under the rubble of their homes or in rugged roads that are difficult to access. The sources confirmed that the continued violent shelling prevents ambulance crews from performing their duties in evacuating bodies, which portends an additional health and environmental catastrophe in the targeted areas.

Medical authorities stressed that the significant deficit in rescue capabilities prevents the relief of those trapped until now, at a time when the occupation continues to impose its strict siege and prevent the entry of humanitarian and medical aid. They appealed to international organizations for the urgent need to intervene immediately to provide safe corridors for medical teams and ensure the protection of civilians and health facilities that have become directly in the line of fire.

Hundreds are still missing under the rubble of destroyed homes and in rugged roads, and our teams face a significant inability to reach them.

The occupying state is facing a escalating diplomatic crisis in the United States, with reports indicating a tangible deterioration in its standing not only within the traditional Democratic camp but also among Republicans. Observers believe that the current far-right government's continued policies could lead to irreparable damage to the strategic relations between Washington and Tel Aviv.

Shlomo Shamir, an expert on American affairs, affirmed that discussing the unprecedented decline in American support has become an urgent necessity that cannot be overlooked. Shamir warned against complacency with the relationship with Donald Trump, pointing out that profound shifts in American public opinion transcend fleeting personal alliances.

Political analyses show a fundamental difference in the nature of support between the two parties; while Democrats historically considered sympathy for Israel part of their political identity, Republicans base their support on political calculations and changing interests. This distinction still exists and directly affects how decisions are made in Washington regarding Middle East issues.

Concern prevails in Israeli circles regarding prominent Democratic figures such as Senator Bernie Sanders, who is described in Israeli right-wing circles as hardline towards the occupation policies. Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, also stands out as an ambitious presidential figure who holds sharply critical stances towards current Israeli practices.

On the Republican side, fears are escalating regarding the influence of figures like Steve Bannon and J.D. Vance, with the latter being viewed as a serious threat due to his stances described as hostile towards Israel. Vance has succeeded in removing figures who were considered bridges for communication with Tel Aviv, such as Jared Kushner, from decision-making circles.

Recent parliamentary statistics indicate a worrying shift, with 40 Democratic senators supporting a resolution to postpone the sale of heavy military equipment to the occupation. Additionally, 36 other members voted in favor of preventing the sale of bombs, reflecting a growing gap between the American administration and the legislative base of the Democratic Party.

Israeli sources accuse Benjamin Netanyahu's government of political blindness towards internal developments in the United States, where Trump is portrayed domestically in Israel as an absolute ally while facing sharp criticism from senior Republicans. This disparity in vision reflects a detachment from the diplomatic and moral reality currently experienced by Washington.

Analysts believe that the presence of ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich in decision-making positions distorts Israel's image unprecedentedly in Western capitals. These ministers represent, for the international community, an extremist face that is difficult to defend, weakening the position of Israel's defenders in international forums.

Ari Yoff, head of the Jewish Reform Movement, explained that American support has reached its lowest historical levels, considering Netanyahu a significant part of this dilemma. He pointed out that American public opinion now links Netanyahu personally with Israel as a single entity, which intensifies the criticism directed at the state as a whole.

Political circles criticize the lack of Israeli awareness of the negative impact the current government has on the international stage, especially in Washington, which is considered the most important ally. This failure is attributed to the ruling coalition's insistence on pursuing ideological agendas that clash with the democratic values claimed by the American administration.

There is a significant gap in Israeli diplomatic action, as opposition leaders are absent from the American scene and do not make sufficient effort to communicate with Jewish communities or community activists. This absence leaves the field open for a narrative that fully links Israel to the policies of the Likud and the far-right.

Reports confirm that the current American criticisms are not directed against Israel's existence per se, but against the policies of the current government and its pivotal figures. However, the continuation of this approach may gradually lead to a shift in criticism from the governmental level to the existential and legitimate level.

Experts believe that restoring traditional support in the United States requires a radical change in Israeli political leadership and its replacement with a more rational government. They believe that the upcoming elections may be the last chance to mitigate the damage caused by the current government's policies and rebuild bridges with both parties.

In conclusion, it appears that the imbalance in American support is no longer merely a fleeting phenomenon associated with a rebellious young generation, but has become an institutional trend permeating centers of power. Israel remaining hostage to internal political whims may cost it the loss of the most important international cover it has enjoyed for decades.

The decline in support for Israel is not limited to Democrats but is also increasing among Republicans, which carries dire political and moral consequences.

Field data and consistent reports have revealed that the Israeli Ministerial Committee secretly approved the establishment of 34 new settlements distributed across the occupied West Bank. This step comes within the framework of accelerating the pace of creeping annexation, with these new outposts concentrated in the Hebron and Jenin governorates and areas near the apartheid wall.

This strategic settlement leap aims to dissolve the June 4, 1967 borders and fragment what remains of the interconnected Palestinian geographical space. Through this expansion, the occupation authorities seek to impose a new demographic and geographical reality that makes the establishment of a contiguous Palestinian state practically impossible.

The tragedy of land dispossession is embodied in the story of citizen Fahd Al-Qawasmi from Hebron, whose land ownership documents have become mere worthless papers in the face of the occupation's mechanisms. Israeli bulldozers began razing his 500-dunum land, which he inherited from his ancestors, in preparation for establishing a new settlement named 'Karmei Yehuda'.

Al-Qawasmi confirms that the settlement encroachment now targets the identity and history of the land, noting that resorting to the occupation police to file complaints has become futile. Local residents believe there is a role reversal between the army and settlers, describing the situation as 'the police officer in uniform during the day is the same settler who attacks us at night'.

Geographically, preliminary maps of the distribution of the 34 new settlements indicate a clear desire to isolate major Palestinian cities from each other. The plan aims to connect large settlement blocs such as 'Gush Etzion' with the 'Karmei Tzur' bloc, which will inevitably separate Hebron from its eastern countryside and from the neighboring Bethlehem Governorate.

Specialized sources in resisting the wall and settlements reported that this expansion aims not only to reduce the areas available to Palestinians but also to create 'cantons' and suffocated human enclaves. This policy works to prevent any natural extension of Palestinian villages and cities, thereby erasing the contiguous geographical presence of the Palestinian people in their homeland.

In a statistical reading of this development, experts in settlement affairs believe that what is happening represents an unprecedented leap in the history of the occupation, as the number of settlements increased from 178 at the beginning of 2023 to about 297 currently. This means that in one year, the occupation approved the equivalent of half of what it built over decades since 1967.

This settlement boom coincides with fundamental changes in laws and the inauguration of a wide network of bypass roads that ensure the complete separation of settlers' movement from Palestinians. This system aims to create two separate entities within the West Bank, one for settlers controlling all resources, and the other for Palestinians scattered in geographical enclaves.

Reports indicate that the last three years, specifically since October 2023, have witnessed a phase of 'rushing towards annexation' through the privatization of settlement fieldwork. The construction of about 28,000 settlement units was approved for 2025 alone, which is the highest number recorded in many years in the records of Israeli expansion.

'Pastoral settlement' has also emerged as one of the most dangerous tools used to control land, where settlers set up tents and sheep pens under army protection to control thousands of dunums. More than 165 pastoral outposts have been observed since 2023, 89 of which were established in 2025, reflecting a frantic acceleration in land grabbing.

The occupation approved in one year the equivalent of 50% of what it built since 1967, completely redefining the geographical reality.

The Lebanese Ministry of Health announced the martyrdom of 14 people, including two children, and the injury of about 37 others as a result of a series of airstrikes launched by Israeli occupation forces on various areas in southern Lebanon. This bloody escalation comes amidst continuous violations of the truce agreement that began on April 17, threatening the collapse of fragile field understandings.

Official sources reported that the occupation army did not only carry out airstrikes but also systematically demolished and destroyed homes and infrastructure in the area between the towns of Yaroun and Bint Jbeil. These operations were accompanied by warnings issued by the Israeli army spokesperson to residents of seven southern towns to evacuate immediately, claiming the presence of Hezbollah military activities there.

In contrast, Hezbollah carried out a complex military operation in the border town of Taybeh, resulting in the death of one Israeli soldier and the injury of six others with varying degrees of wounds, four of whom were described as critical. According to field data, the operation began with a precise targeting of an Israeli force attempting to repair a 'Merkava' tank in the town square, about 3.5 kilometers from the border.

Field sources explained that Hezbollah used small, suicidal (FPV) drones in its attack, which are characterized by high precision and maneuverability to reach sensitive targets. Footage broadcast by Israeli media showed the moment one of these drones exploded near a gathering of soldiers, causing severe confusion among the force present at the scene.

The attack did not stop at the first strike but extended to include the rescue force of Unit '669', specialized in medical evacuation, which intervened to transport the injured by helicopters and ground vehicles. During the evacuation attempt, Hezbollah launched two additional drones; defense systems managed to intercept one of them, while the second exploded very close to the landing site, forcing the helicopter to take off immediately under threat.

Cameras mounted on Israeli soldiers' helmets documented moments of terror during the second targeting, with footage showing the drones' precision in tracking moving and stationary targets on the battlefield. These operations reflect an evolution in Hezbollah's tactics through the use of remote-control technologies that allow for extremely precise targeting of tank hatches and fortified positions.

Follow-up reports indicated that the past twenty-four hours witnessed intensive use of this type of aerial weapon, with Hezbollah launching more than seven suicidal drones. These attacks targeted gatherings of occupation soldiers within occupied Lebanese territories and at points close to the border strip, significantly hindering Israeli military movements.

In Haifa, Rambam Hospital received a number of wounded who were transported by military helicopters from the operation site in Taybeh. Israeli medical sources confirmed that the injuries resulted from direct shrapnel from the drone explosions, noting that some cases are still in intensive care due to the severity of their wounds.

For its part, civil defense and ambulance teams in southern Lebanon continue to retrieve victims from under the rubble of homes destroyed by recent Israeli raids. Medical teams face extreme difficulties in reaching some targeted areas due to the continuous intensive overflights of Israeli warplanes and reconnaissance aircraft that do not leave Lebanese airspace.

Observers believe that this mutual escalation puts the truce agreement at risk, especially with Israel expanding the scope of its targeting to directly include civilians and infrastructure. In contrast, Hezbollah demonstrates an ability to adapt to field conditions and use qualitative weapons to impose new equations in the ongoing ground confrontation at the front edge of the border.

Hezbollah targeted a Merkava tank in the Taybeh town square with two kamikaze drones, then pursued the rescue force during evacuation operations.

Iranian Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, left the Pakistani capital Islamabad on Sunday, heading to the Russian capital Moscow in a new stop on his intensive diplomatic tour. This visit comes at a time when the region is witnessing rapid movement aimed at addressing outstanding issues, most notably the Iranian nuclear program and escalating tensions in the Middle East.

Araghchi is scheduled to hold an important meeting on Monday with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to the Iranian Ambassador to Russia, Kazem Jalali. Discussions will focus on reviewing the latest developments in the indirect negotiations taking place with the United States, in addition to discussing efforts for a ceasefire in the region and common security files.

The Russian Foreign Ministry, for its part, confirmed that the Iranian minister's visit falls within the framework of official diplomatic consultations between the two countries. Although precise details of the agenda have not been disclosed, the timing indicates Tehran's desire to coordinate positions with its Russian ally before taking further steps in the negotiation process.

Araghchi had made a second visit to Pakistan over the weekend, a country that plays a pivotal role in mediation between Tehran and Washington. These moves coincided with reports of the cancellation of an anticipated visit by US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, reflecting a state of stagnation in achieving a tangible breakthrough.

Current data indicate the continued political stalemate regarding the nuclear agreement, despite the continuation of indirect communication channels through regional mediators. Through this tour, which also included the Sultanate of Oman, Tehran is trying to solidify its positions and ensure the support of influential international powers in the face of continuous US pressure.

Regarding the nature of communication with the American side, informed sources clarified that the messages currently exchanged do not reach the level of direct negotiations. These correspondences are limited to clarifying the Iranian vision on strategic issues and confirming adherence to the red lines drawn by the supreme leadership in Tehran.

All Iranian diplomatic moves are under the direct supervision of the Supreme National Security Council, which is responsible for formulating the country's major policies. This internal coordination aims to ensure the unity of the negotiating position, especially in light of the changes that have occurred in some technical delegations tasked with following up on the technical details of the nuclear file.

Sources reported that the Iranian approach to the nuclear file differs fundamentally from the American vision, as Tehran considers it an existential issue linked to its future and international standing. In contrast, Washington believes that the file is part of a broader political agenda related to regional security arrangements and limiting Iranian influence in the region.

Tehran emphasizes in all its diplomatic meetings its categorical rejection of any proposals that include transferring its enriched uranium stockpile outside its borders. However, Iranian officials show cautious flexibility towards the possibility of reaching limited understandings, provided that there is political will from other parties and respect for Iranian sovereignty.

Iran affirms its adherence to its uranium stockpile and its complete rejection of the idea of transferring it outside the country, while keeping the door open for limited understandings.

American intellectual and director of the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Jeffrey Sachs, described American and Israeli military moves against Iran as a 'war of illusions' lacking realism. He explained in statements to media sources that this confrontation was built on erroneous intelligence and political assessments that deluded themselves into believing in the ability to subjugate Tehran by military force, pointing out that the absence of a clear path to achieving goals is the main reason behind the decline in international support for these approaches.

Sachs held only two individuals responsible for the current escalation: Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump, emphasizing that this war is not based on popular support in the United States or the European continent. He called on international powers, especially the Gulf states, to take a firm stance demanding an immediate cessation of military operations, warning that persistence in this approach will only lead to more chaos and instability in the regional security structure.

Regarding political solutions, the American intellectual asserted that there can be no talk of sustainable peace in the Middle East without a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue in accordance with international law. He stressed that the core of conflicts in the region is linked to the absence of an independent Palestinian state, calling for its establishment on the lands of Gaza and the West Bank with Jerusalem as its capital, considering that the Israeli rejection of this entitlement is the real fuel for the cycle of ongoing conflicts.

Sachs also directed scathing criticism at American foreign policy, pointing to the profound impact of what he described as the 'Zionist lobby' in pushing Washington towards wars of attrition in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya. He believed that these interventions did not serve the interests of stability, but rather hindered real peace opportunities and led to the fragmentation of the political fabric of several Arab countries, which necessitates a comprehensive review of American alliances and sovereign decisions in the region.

Sachs refuted the claims of victory promoted by the White House regarding the war on Iran, emphasizing that the on-the-ground and economic reality indicates a deep crisis that has not yet been overcome. He cited the failure of this war by the continued global economic tensions, rising energy prices, and disruption of navigation in vital waterways, considering that these indicators reflect a strategic failure at all military and political levels.

Sachs concluded his vision by emphasizing that ending the conflict is possible immediately if the United States and Israel decide to withdraw and return to diplomatic paths, warning of the catastrophic cost of continuing the military option. He also touched on the internal American situation, considering that the assassination attempts against Trump are a reflection of a societal crisis linked to the spread of weapons and sharp division, despite ruling out their direct impact on the course of ongoing foreign wars.

The current war is a war of illusions created by Netanyahu and Trump, and it does not enjoy widespread popular support in the West.

By: Said Arikat

April 27, 2026

News Analysis

Washington, D.C- For seventy-eight years, Palestinians have repeatedly been told to trust the very powers that enabled their dispossession. They were urged to believe that the United States would act as an honest broker, that Israel would eventually choose justice over expansion, and that patience, moderation, and endless negotiations would somehow produce freedom. Instead, this wager has yielded one of the clearest records of betrayal in modern diplomacy.

From 1948 until today, betting on the United States and Israel has not simply failed—it has deepened Palestinian loss. Washington has offered rhetoric while shielding Israel from accountability, and Israel has offered negotiations while entrenching occupation. The result has been a relentless cycle of promises, delay, and irreversible facts on the ground.

The story begins in 1948, when the United States swiftly recognized the new State of Israel while more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled during the Nakba. Their towns were emptied, their properties confiscated, and their national life shattered. Yet while Israeli statehood was affirmed, Palestinian rights were pushed aside. Refugee return, restitution, and self-determination were postponed to an undefined future that never came. Palestinian dispossession was not remedied—it was normalized.

After the 1967 war, Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. The world spoke of temporary occupation and land for peace. Nearly six decades later, the occupation remains, transformed into a permanent system of settlements, checkpoints, walls, raids, and unequal legal structures. The United States had enormous leverage to halt this trajectory. Instead, successive administrations largely financed, excused, or diplomatically managed it. Each year of inaction sent the same message: international law becomes flexible when Palestinians are the victims.

No phrase has damaged the Palestinian cause more than the so-called peace process. Presented as a path to statehood, it often functioned as political cover for colonization. While diplomats convened summits and issued optimistic statements, settlements multiplied and Palestinian land was carved into disconnected enclaves. Palestinians were expected to prove moderation, reform institutions, suppress resistance, and concede in advance. Israel, meanwhile, negotiated while changing realities on the ground. One side talked; the other built.

The clearest example was Oslo. Palestinians recognized Israel and accepted a state on only 22 percent of historic Palestine. In return, they were promised phased withdrawal and sovereignty. What emerged instead was limited autonomy under occupation. The Palestinian Authority received administrative burdens without real power, while Israel retained control over borders, movement, water, airspace, and security. Oslo did not end occupation—it subcontracted parts of its management. Settlements expanded dramatically during the very years supposedly devoted to peace.

The greatest fiction sustaining this process was the notion of the United States as neutral mediator. Washington arms Israel, funds Israel, shields Israel at the United Nations, and coordinates strategically with Israel—then presents itself as referee. No credible mediator bankrolls one side while lecturing the other about compromise. American diplomacy repeatedly pressured Palestinians to accept realities created by force, while asking Israel only to discuss whether it might someday restrain itself.

Nowhere has this failed bet been more brutally exposed than in Gaza. Since the blockade imposed in 2007, Gaza has endured repeated large-scale Israeli wars that destroyed any illusion that negotiations or American guarantees could protect civilians. In 2008–2009, Israel’s assault killed more than 1,300 Palestinians and devastated neighborhoods and infrastructure. In 2012, another war struck the enclave, again leaving death and ruin while the siege remained intact. In 2014, more than 2,200 Palestinians were killed, including hundreds of children, and vast residential areas were reduced to rubble. Again during the March of Return in 2018, then again in 2021. Each time, ceasefires were announced, reconstruction was promised, and the world moved on.

Then came the catastrophe after October 7, 2023. What followed has been described by many legal scholars and rights advocates as genocidal destruction. More than 72,000 Palestinian men, women, and children have been killed, with many thousands more believed buried beneath the rubble. Entire families were erased. Residential districts, refugee camps, hospitals, universities, roads, and water systems were shattered. Hunger, displacement, disease, and trauma became the defining conditions of life. Gaza was not merely attacked—it was systematically broken.

Throughout these wars, Washington voiced concern for civilians while continuing to arm, finance, and diplomatically protect Israel. Calls for restraint rarely became meaningful pressure. Temporary pauses came only after immense devastation had already been inflicted. Gaza became the ultimate lesson: American sympathy, when offered, does not equal protection.

Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, tolerance of settlement expansion, and normalization deals that sidelined Palestinian rights merely stripped away the final illusions. What had long been disguised as mediation became open alignment. Palestinians were asked to accept shrinking horizons while being told this was realism. In truth, it was surrender repackaged as diplomacy.

Why has this bet failed so consistently? Because the structure itself is designed to fail Palestinians. Israel gains territory while talks continue. The United States offers process instead of justice. Delay benefits the occupier, not the occupied. Palestinian concessions become permanent, while Israeli promises remain optional. International outrage rises briefly, then fades without consequence.

The only viable path forward is one rooted not in illusion but in leverage: Palestinian political renewal, democratic legitimacy, national unity, grassroots resilience, legal accountability, and diversified alliances beyond Washington’s monopoly. Diplomacy matters—but diplomacy without pressure is pleading before power.

For generations, Palestinians were told to wait: wait for the next summit, the next envoy, the next election, the next president. While they waited, land disappeared, settlements spread, Jerusalem was transformed, Gaza was strangled, and occupation hardened.

The tragedy is not only that this bet failed. It is that it failed exactly as history warned it would.

By Said Arikat

The United States has long sold itself to the world as a sanctuary for free thought, political dissent, and opportunity. But under Donald Trump, that promise is being hollowed out. According to a recent New York Times report, internal Department of Homeland Security training materials show the administration expanding ideological screening for green card applicants—particularly targeting criticism of Israel and expressions of support for Palestinian rights.

This is not routine immigration enforcement. It is a loyalty purge dressed up as border policy.

For generations, permanent residency decisions were meant to rest on objective criteria: criminal history, fraud, security risks, and legal eligibility. Now, the standard appears to be mutating into something darker. Social media posts, political opinions, and moral outrage over the destruction of Gaza may now be treated as evidence against an applicant.

The message is brutally clear: if you want to build a life in America, keep quiet about Palestine.

Among the examples reportedly flagged were posts saying “Stop Israeli terrorism in Palestine,” maps replacing Israel with Palestine, and expressions of sympathy for civilians trapped under siege and bombardment in Gaza. One may debate slogans or imagery, but these are political statements—not violent acts, not criminal conspiracies, not threats to national security.

Yet in Trump’s America, opposing war can become grounds for punishment.

That should alarm every defender of civil liberty. The First Amendment was designed precisely to protect controversial speech. American courts have upheld the right to express offensive, symbolic, and deeply unpopular political views. But Trump appears determined to create a two-tier system: constitutional freedoms for some, ideological vetting for everyone else.

Citizens may speak. Immigrants must obey.

What is unfolding is a corruption of immigration law into an instrument of political coercion. A green card applicant is not applying to become a soldier in Washington’s foreign policy machine. They are applying to live, work, and contribute to society. Yet the administration seems to be saying that fairness now depends on one’s willingness to stay aligned with official narratives—especially where Israel is concerned.

This is where the hypocrisy becomes impossible to ignore.

Trump officials defend these measures as part of a campaign against antisemitism and anti-American extremism. Real antisemitism exists, and it must be fought without hesitation. But deliberately conflating hatred of Jews with criticism of the Israeli state is a cynical abuse of language. It turns a serious moral struggle into a political shield for a foreign government.

Millions of people—including Jewish Americans, Israeli dissidents, scholars, journalists, and human rights organizations—criticize Israeli policies. Are they extremists? Are they enemies of America? Of course not. They are participating in democratic debate. But once criticism of Israel is recast as dangerous thought, repression becomes easier to justify.

This is precisely the point.

The administration is not merely protecting Israel diplomatically or militarily. It is attempting to protect Israel from criticism inside the United States by threatening the legal futures of vulnerable non-citizens. That crosses a profound line. It suggests that allegiance to Israeli sensitivities now carries more weight than America’s own free speech principles.

The numbers tell part of the story. Reports indicate a steep decline in green card approvals in recent months. Whether through direct denials or endless bureaucratic delay, the strategy appears consistent: make lawful immigration so punishing, expensive, and uncertain that people surrender before the government has to reject them outright.

Cruelty through paperwork is still cruelty.

Even the language of governance has changed. Immigration officers reportedly have been rebranded from public service employees into “defenders of the homeland.” That militarized rhetoric is revealing. It casts migrants as invaders, applicants as suspects, and bureaucrats as frontline combatants. A civilian agency once tasked with processing petitions now behaves like an ideological checkpoint.

America has seen this disease before.

During the McCarthy era, accusations of disloyalty were used to blacklist dissenters, narrow public discourse, and frighten institutions into compliance. Today the labels have changed, but the instinct is identical. Then it was communism. Now it is Palestinian solidarity. Then it was subversion. Now it is social media sympathy for bombed civilians.

Different era, same paranoia.

The tragedy is that this strategy may produce short-term political rewards. It flatters nativist instincts, energizes parts of Trump’s base, and reinforces the mythology that America is under siege from foreigners and dissenters alike. But the long-term cost will be severe.

The United States built much of its strength by attracting people who believed freedom here was more than propaganda. Scientists, students, entrepreneurs, refugees, artists, and workers came because America promised room to breathe. If that promise is replaced by surveillance, ideological tests, and compulsory silence, the country will lose something more valuable than any election cycle can measure.

It will lose credibility.

Abroad, many already suspect that Washington invokes democracy selectively—celebrating freedom when convenient, suppressing it when uncomfortable. Policies like these confirm the charge. They tell the world that human rights matter until Israel is criticized, and free speech matters until Palestine is mentioned.

That is not strength. It is insecurity masquerading as patriotism.

A serious democracy does not tremble at a protest slogan. It does not treat sympathy for civilians as extremism. It does not force immigrants to whisper their conscience in exchange for legal status. And it certainly does not subordinate constitutional values to the sensitivities of a foreign ally.

If America now grants green cards only to the politically obedient, then the issue is no longer immigration alone. It is whether the republic still believes in the freedoms it advertises.

Israeli occupation forces continue their systematic violations against fishermen in the Gaza Strip, targeting small boats and beaches with heavy gunfire and shells. These attacks come amid repeated breaches of ceasefire understandings, exacerbating the humanitarian suffering of thousands of fishermen who rely on the sea as their sole source of livelihood.

Field sources reported that about 4,000 Palestinian fishermen have been directly affected by these continuous pursuits, which prevent them from reaching deep waters. The sources explained that hundreds of boats that were sunk by occupation gunboats are now nothing but scattered wreckage, a scene that embodies the extent of the destruction inflicted on this vital sector.

For his part, Zakaria Bakr, head of the Fishermen's Committees, confirmed that Israeli violations occur daily and vary between direct shooting and the sinking of equipment. Bakr pointed out that this policy aims to impose a comprehensive naval blockade, as the intensity of these attacks has escalated recently to include the complete destruction of fishing infrastructure.

Bakr revealed shocking differences between the reality of fishing before the war and the current situation. Previously, the sector included about a thousand motorized boats, 96 of which were large. Today, fishermen have been forced to use very primitive means of flotation, such as styrofoam boards and old refrigerator doors, in a desperate attempt to secure their daily sustenance.

In terms of production, the occupation's prevention of the entry and operation of boat engines for more than two and a half years has led to the collapse of the sector's productive capacity. The daily fishing rate has decreased from about 20 tons of fish to only about 10 tons per month, leading to a significant shortage in local markets and rising prices.

The losses were not limited to material aspects but also extended to direct targeting of facilities, as Gaza port was bombed with about 26 Israeli missiles. The destruction also affected equipment stores and fishing nets, making the restoration of normal activity in this sector extremely difficult without urgent international intervention.

Regarding human cost, official statistics indicate that the occupation has killed more than 232 fishermen since the escalation began, in addition to injuring and arresting hundreds. Dozens of fishermen are still languishing in Israeli prisons, while the injured suffer from disabilities that prevent them from returning to their arduous profession.

The occupation navy imposes strict restrictions on fishing areas, often preventing fishermen from exceeding a distance of only one kilometer from the shore. This narrow area is monitored by warships that do not hesitate to open heavy machine gun fire on any boat attempting to secure its livelihood.

Despite continuous communication with human rights organizations and international institutions, fishermen confirm that verbal solidarity has not translated into practical steps to protect them from the occupation's bullets. Fishermen emphasize their continued sailing despite the imminent dangers, asserting that steadfastness is their only option to confront the systematic starvation policy.

The Palestinian fisherman today is faced with a choice between a complete ban on practicing his profession or risking his life under Israeli shelling.

The occupied Palestinian territories witnessed a dangerous field escalation at dawn today, Sunday, as occupation forces carried out a series of bloody incursions concentrated in the northern West Bank governorates. These attacks resulted in injuries among civilians and widespread destruction of private property, as part of the ongoing policy of restriction on the residents.

In field details, medical sources reported that a 27-year-old young man was injured by live bullets in the thigh area, while his 28-year-old wife was injured by bullet shrapnel in the face. These injuries occurred during a violent incursion carried out by occupation forces into Duma village, south of Nablus, where the injured were transferred to the hospital for urgent treatment.

Local sources confirmed that occupation soldiers directly targeted the Dawabsheh family home in the village, firing live bullets inside the residential rooms, causing panic among family members. The soldiers did not stop at shooting, but also deliberately destroyed the contents of the house and tampered with citizens' belongings before withdrawing from the area.

In Nablus city, occupation forces launched a raid and search campaign that affected Sufyan Street, where a Palestinian girl was arrested after raiding her family's home. Sources stated that the invading forces wreaked havoc in the house and destroyed parts of its furniture, as part of the daily arrest campaign targeting Palestinian cadres and youth in various cities.

As for Bethlehem Governorate, the occupation authorities continued their policy of collective punishment by closing a number of vital roads with earth mounds in Tuqu' town. These closures targeted the entrances to Khirbet al-Deir and the central areas of the town, hindering the movement of citizens and preventing them from reaching essential service centers in Bethlehem city.

Regarding settler attacks, extremist groups from the 'Adei Ad' settlement carried out an environmental massacre in Turmus Ayya town, northeast of Ramallah. The settlers cut down and destroyed about 400 olive trees in the town's plain, which represents a severe economic blow to farmers who depend on these trees as a primary source of livelihood.

This crime in Turmus Ayya comes a few days after settlers burned a house and a vehicle in the same town, under the protection of the occupation army. These repeated attacks reflect an attrition approach aimed at displacing Palestinians from their lands and expanding the settlement area at the expense of their historical properties.

In a related context, the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission revealed terrifying statistical data, recording 1819 attacks during last March alone. These violations were distributed between the occupation army, which carried out 1322 attacks, and settlers, who launched 497 attacks targeting people, trees, and stones in various governorates.

Data showed that Hebron Governorate topped the list of areas most exposed to violations with 321 attacks, followed by Nablus with 315 attacks, then Ramallah and Al-Bireh with 292. These figures indicate the occupation's focus on population centers in the West Bank to break the will of steadfastness among citizens.

In Hebron city, occupation forces imposed severe repressive measures, including a curfew in Jaber, Salaymeh, and Wadi al-Hussein neighborhoods. Human rights sources reported that soldiers prevented residents from standing on their balconies or ascending to rooftops, and also detained a number of citizens, preventing them from returning to their homes for long hours.

In Qusra town, south of Nablus, settlers attacked the home of citizen Youssef Abd al-Salam in the Ras al-Ain area, besieging the family inside the house in harsh conditions. The attackers cut off electricity to the house and issued direct threats to the residents, in an attempt to intimidate them and force them to leave the area.

On the political and local level, settler attacks prevented Khirbet 'Yarza', east of Tubas, from participating in the 2026 local elections. Local sources confirmed that the escalation of settler terrorism prevented any candidates from running for the village council, thus disrupting the democratic and service path in the area.

Official data indicate that the West Bank has been in a state of turmoil since October 2023, with more than 1153 martyrs killed by occupation and settler bullets. Thousands have also been injured to varying degrees, while the number of detainees has exceeded 22,000 Palestinians, in the largest arrest campaign the region has witnessed in decades.

This systematic escalation, which combines the military force of the army and organized settler attacks, places the international community before its legal and moral responsibilities. Continued silence in the face of these crimes encourages the occupation to proceed with its policy of silent ethnic cleansing and the destruction of the elements of life in the occupied West Bank.

Occupation forces escalated their repressive measures against residents in Hebron neighborhoods and imposed a curfew that prevents citizens from even standing at their windows.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog has made a decisive decision to refuse a presidential pardon for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the corruption cases he faces in court. Informed sources confirmed that Herzog does not intend to bypass the existing legal process, preferring to maintain the independence of the judicial institution in the face of increasing political pressure.

Instead of a comprehensive pardon, Herzog is moving towards playing a mediating role between Netanyahu and the public prosecution to reach a balanced judicial settlement. These moves aim to find a legal solution that ends the political and judicial crisis that has been ongoing for years without compromising the prestige of Israeli law.

Leaked information indicates that the potential prosecution deal may include mitigated penalties that do not involve actual imprisonment, but rather are limited to voluntary work for the public. The settlement may also include the payment of significant financial compensation in exchange for closing the cases that have caused a sharp division within Israeli society.

Benjamin Netanyahu initiated a formal request for a pardon from the Israeli presidency last November, considering it a necessary step for national reconciliation. Netanyahu justified his request by stating that the current military and national circumstances require an immediate end to legal proceedings to focus on external challenges.

In his official letter, Netanyahu claimed that the continuation of his trial contributes to tearing apart the internal fabric of Israeli society at a sensitive time. Despite emphasizing his personal desire to prove his innocence through the judiciary, he stressed that the public interest requires halting legal prosecution.

US President Donald Trump directly intervened in the crisis, sending official messages to Herzog demanding that he pardon his close ally. Trump did not stop at messages, but publicly reiterated his call during a speech he delivered before the Israeli Knesset during his last visit in October.

Trump addressed his Israeli counterpart from the Knesset platform, questioning why he was not using his powers to end Netanyahu's trial. The US President considered this step to be in the interest of regional stability, which put Herzog under unprecedented international diplomatic pressure.

However, Herzog's response adhered to national sovereignty, as he explained to Trump that Israel has an independent legal system that must be fully respected. The Israeli President indicated that despite his deep appreciation for his friendship with Trump, internal judicial decisions are subject to purely national standards.

It is worth noting that Netanyahu's trial has entered its fifth year, where he faces serious charges including bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in several cases. This case is the longest and most complex in the history of Israeli judiciary, as it is closely linked to Netanyahu's political future and government stability.

Israel is a sovereign state and its legal system must be fully respected, despite my appreciation for President Trump's friendship and opinion.

A group of academics and activists launched a comprehensive documentary report titled 'Remember Them: Palestinian Scientists Killed in the Gaza Genocide,' aiming to monitor the systematic Israeli targeting of the scientific elite in the Strip. The report presents the biographies of dozens of professors and researchers who were martyred with their families due to direct bombing of their homes or displacement centers during the ongoing war.

The report's release coincides with the inauguration of a digital archive bearing the same name, which aims to collect and preserve the curricula vitae and scientific achievements of Palestinian scientists lost in Gaza. The project organizers describe what the academic cadres have been subjected to as a 'systematic genocide' that falls within a broader context of genocide targeting the Palestinian presence in all its sectors.

The report's authors affirmed that the crimes committed against academics obligate the international community to intervene immediately, noting that the victims were internationally renowned in their research fields. They stressed that these scientists were not only a property of Palestine but formed an integral part of the global intellectual community, which lost outstanding scientific and humanitarian contributions with their passing.

The report highlighted prominent examples of martyrs, foremost among them physicist Sofian Tayeh, president of the Islamic University and holder of the UNESCO Chair in Physics and Space Sciences. The documentation also included engineer Khaled Al-Ramlawi, professor of engineering, and young lecturer Rula Abdel Jawad, along with dozens of specialists in medicine, social sciences, and humanities.

The project does not only document human losses but also paints a bleak picture of the organized destruction that has affected the higher education infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. Documentary sources reported that the occupation destroyed all 12 universities operating in the Strip, in addition to seven other educational institutions, leading to a complete paralysis of the educational system.

Data indicates that more than 57 university buildings, including faculties, laboratories, and historical libraries, were completely razed to the ground by the end of March 2025. The methods of destruction varied between direct aerial bombardment and deliberate detonation with mines after some university buildings were converted into temporary barracks and military centers.

The report paused at the crime of destroying Al-Israa University, which the Israeli army occupied for several weeks before completely blowing it up in January 2024. The demolition included lecture halls and advanced laboratories, in addition to the national museum, which housed thousands of rare artifacts documenting the region's history.

Academics drew attention to the phenomenon of 'scholasticide,' a term that expresses the deliberate attack on the educational system to break the will of society. Experts believe that this targeting aims to strip Palestinians of the ability to produce knowledge in the future and hinder the path of sustainable development.

Regarding student losses, the report revealed that approximately 87,000 male and female students were deprived of their right to university education as a result of the destruction of educational institutions. It also documented the martyrdom of more than 1,200 university students and over 200 faculty members, most of whom were targeted in direct raids.

The report clarified that the real loss is not only in numbers but in the educational and societal roles that these professors played. These individuals represented the scientific authority and role models for the rising generation of doctors, engineers, and writers who are relied upon to build an independent Palestinian state.

The text pointed to the significant challenges faced by academics in Gaza before their martyrdom, as many of them chose to return to the Strip after completing their studies abroad. These individuals continued their scientific contributions despite the suffocating siege imposed since 2007, and the accompanying severe shortage of resources and continuous power outages.

The archive's website is considered a 'project in formation,' as volunteers continue to collect information from victims' families and human rights organizations to update the data. The website aims to be a global reference that commemorates Palestinian scientists and demands accountability for those responsible for their direct and deliberate targeting.

The report concluded by emphasizing that documenting these biographies comes within the framework of honoring the achievements of the deceased scientists and insisting on prosecuting their killers legally. The initiative's organizers stressed that Palestinian memory will remain alive, and attempts to erase Gaza's cognitive identity will not succeed in light of ongoing documentation and archiving efforts.

The elimination of faculty members and the destruction of universities represent 'scholasticide' aimed at breaking Palestinian society and stripping it of the tools of knowledge.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) announced emergency austerity measures, including reducing working and school days in all five of its regions. The agency clarified that this step comes amid a suffocating financial crisis that threatens its ability to fulfill its commitments towards millions of refugees, which prompted it to adjust the schedule of its educational institutions.

Under the new decisions, school hours in the occupied West Bank and other areas will be reduced to only four days a week instead of five. This step aims to cut operational expenses while trying to maintain the minimum level of the educational process and ensure it does not completely stop in the coming period.

The package of measures also included a reduction in staff working hours in various sectors, including teaching staff, by up to 20 percent. Responsible sources confirmed that this decision applies in the five operational regions, which include Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, to ensure the distribution of remaining financial burdens across all sectors.

The international agency indicated that these measures will remain in effect until the end of the current year as a minimum, describing them as temporary measures imposed by current circumstances. Through this austerity, UNRWA seeks to ensure the continuity of essential relief and health services that are indispensable amid the deteriorating living conditions of refugees.

Jonathan Fowler, the agency's communications director, had warned earlier this month that increasing political and economic pressures had already led to a 20 percent decline in the quality and volume of services. Fowler explained that the accumulated financial deficit now threatens the institutional entity of the agency and its ability to implement the UN mandate granted to it decades ago.

The roots of the current crisis go back to the incitement campaign launched by the Israeli occupation against the agency and its staff following the events of October 7, 2023, which prompted donor countries to suspend their funding. Despite some countries resuming their support, the funding gap remains very wide, directly affecting salaries and logistical services in the camps.

It is worth noting that UNRWA, established in 1949, operates approximately 96 schools in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem alone, where more than 47,000 students receive their basic education. The agency is considered the only lifeline for millions of Palestinian refugees who depend on it for food, healthcare, and education in the absence of political solutions to their issue.

These measures are temporary and time-bound until the end of the current year to ensure the continuity of essential services.

Since the start of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip after October 7, 2023, hardly a day passes for the residents of the Gaza Strip without hearing news of the martyrdom of dozens of innocent children, whether by aerial or artillery bombardment, even after the declaration of a ceasefire in Gaza, we still hear every day news of the martyrdom of children from the Gaza Strip, either by an Israeli sniper's bullet, or by an Israeli bombing of Hamas police and security elements in the streets of Gaza, during which children pass.

The Israeli army has become increasingly ferocious day by day, and does not care about the shedding of the blood of innocent Gaza children, justifying this to international media and human rights organizations, that the killing of children is merely unintended collateral damage of war, knowing that the Israeli army possesses the latest types of military technology that can easily detect the nature of those targeted by any Israeli bombing or sniping operation, whether they are adults or children.

But it seems that the Israeli army and its political and military leadership, from the top of the pyramid to the soldier in the field, brutally ignore the right of the Palestinian child to life and protection!

To clarify the Israeli behavior of killing Gaza children, as a result of high orders from the top of the Israeli pyramid to the ordinary soldier, it can be said that the process of killing Palestinian children, especially in the Gaza Strip, has been officially legalized through the Israeli political and military levels, which gave an open permit to any Israeli soldier in the field not to hesitate to kill Gaza children, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

What confirms the hypothesis of the open permit for Israeli soldiers to kill children in the Gaza Strip is what Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant officially stated at the beginning of the war on the Gaza Strip after October 7, 2023, when he literally said: "We are dealing with human animals in the Gaza Strip."

Therefore, this official statement by the Minister of Defense is considered the cornerstone of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, because this statement is an official message to Israeli officers and soldiers that the residents of the Gaza Strip and their children are monsters and deserve to be killed regardless of their age, and it is a political statement that dehumanizes the Palestinian person and his children in the Gaza Strip, in order to justify the killing of Palestinian families with their children without any mercy or compassion.

It is very clear that the use of the phrase "human animals" did not come by chance, but Gallant used it deliberately, based on the theory of "dehumanization of enemies," where according to this theory, the child victim is stripped of his humanity, and here the soldiers' minds stop activating the natural empathetic response to children, which makes killing children or civilians seem like "removing a threat" rather than killing humans.

Among the psychological theories adopted by Israeli leaders and soldiers to justify Israel's killing of Gaza children without any concern is the theory of "moral disengagement," proposed by psychologist Albert Bandura, which explains how individuals convince themselves that their moral standards do not apply in a particular context. This is done by Israel through moral justification: "We are doing this to protect our people" or "This is necessary to eliminate terrorism."

This theory clearly explains the behavior of Israeli political and military leaders in their indifference to killing Gaza children, even though these leaders are fathers, mothers, grandfathers, and grandmothers, and have children and grandchildren, and human nature naturally rejects the killing of children, whether they are children of their own country or children of enemies!

However, by adopting the theory of "moral disengagement," the Israeli political and military leadership abandoned its natural human instinct, believing that by not caring about the killing of Palestinian children, Israel would achieve victory at any cost, and that the end might justify the means!

As for Israeli intelligence officers who may be fathers or mothers and have children waiting for them at home at the end of the day, but when they see children on their computer screen passing near an Israeli assassination target, they ignore that and then issue an order to assassinate the target without any regard for killing the children near that target, they often justify the killing of children to themselves according to the rule of "displacement of responsibility," meaning that they may feel that they are merely tools executing higher orders, and therefore they may place moral responsibility on their leaders and not on themselves personally, which explains their indifference to killing Gaza children, but of course, this Israeli justification never absolves these officers of the responsibility for the deliberate killing of these innocent children.

The ordinary Israeli soldier's justification for his criminal behavior towards the children of the Gaza Strip does not differ from that of Israeli intelligence officers, as when an Israeli soldier snipes a Palestinian child near the yellow line without any concern, he does so under the rule of trying to prove himself in front of the group's harshness, meaning he tries to prove himself to his army that he is strong and does not weaken in front of the enemy and that sympathy for enemy children is considered treason. Also, the soldier acts in his dealings with Palestinian children from the standpoint of existential fear, meaning he believes that his existence is linked to the annihilation of the other, so bombing and sniping become in his view "self-defense," no matter how criminal the results lead to the killing of innocent children.

These behavioral and psychological explanations for the actions of Israelis towards the children of the Gaza Strip, from the top of the pyramid to the ordinary soldier, largely illustrate the racist and inhumane view adopted by Israelis towards the Palestinian people and their children, and indicate that the deliberate killing of Palestinian children under security pretexts and immoral psychological justifications contradicts the natural instinct of the ordinary human being who rejects the killing of innocent children even if they are classified as children of enemies.

There is no psychological, moral, or legal justification for killing innocent children, who have no power or strength, and no fault other than their bad luck that made them live in a region of conflict and continuous wars.

Therefore, it can be said to the Israeli Prime Minister who draws the army's supreme policy, and the Minister of Defense who dehumanizes the Palestinian child to justify his killing, and the Israeli Chief of Staff who issues war orders without instructions to his soldiers not to kill children, and the intelligence officer who sees a child passing in the street on his computer screen and issues an order to assassinate someone without caring about the possibility of killing this child, and the ordinary Israeli soldier who uses his rifle indiscriminately to snipe children:

You may kill as many children of the Gaza Strip as you wish! And you may justify the killing of these innocent children as you wish! And you may celebrate as you wish with an immoral toast of victory from the blood of Gaza's children! But never forget that the curse of Gaza's children will one day befall you, and that the innocent souls of Gaza's children will disturb your sleep and haunt you in your nightmares and may afflict you with a curse that will one day cause you psychological and physical illnesses, as long as you continue to kill these children, without any mercy or compassion, as nothing ever justifies the killing of innocent children, even if they are children of enemies!

In an unprecedented move reflecting a fundamental shift in Rome's foreign policy, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni announced the suspension of the automatic renewal of the defense agreement with Israel. This decision comes amid increasing pressure from Italian public opinion and an implicit acknowledgment that continued military partnership has become a moral and legal burden on the government.

Meloni officially announced this decision on April 14, 2026, during her visit to Verona, indicating that the current situation no longer allows for the continuation of previous mechanisms. Defense Minister Guido Crosetto formally conveyed this decision to his Israeli counterpart, effectively ending a memorandum of understanding that had been automatically renewed every five years since 2003.

This agreement has been the most important legal framework governing military relations between Rome and Tel Aviv for over two decades, ratified by the Italian Parliament under Law No. 94 of 2005. Areas of cooperation include the exchange of advanced military equipment, technological research and development, as well as joint military exercises and the exchange of combat expertise.

Military cooperation peaked in previous years through major deals that included supplying Israel with Italian M-346 training aircraft, in exchange for Italy receiving advanced satellites and intelligence systems. However, the current suspension represents a qualitative escalation that goes beyond the new arms export ban adopted by Italy in October 2024.

The reasons behind this decision are numerous, most notably the serious incident in southern Lebanon, where Rome accused Israeli forces of targeting a convoy of Italian soldiers operating within UNIFIL forces. This aggression prompted Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani to summon the Israeli ambassador and deliver a firm message on the need to protect Italian soldiers.

In addition to field tensions, economic repercussions played a crucial role, as the closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to regional conflicts led to a dramatic rise in fuel prices. The Italian government was forced to spend approximately 500 million euros to reduce fuel taxes, amid warnings of the country entering a severe economic recession.

The role of popular and societal pressure, which served as the primary driver for this political shift, cannot be overlooked. Italy witnessed historic strikes and massive demonstrations in 75 cities. Protesters, under the slogan 'Let's shut everything down,' demanded an immediate halt to arms shipments to Israel in solidarity with the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.

On the domestic political front, Meloni's government faced fierce opposition pressure. Giuseppe Conte, leader of the Five Star Movement, criticized what he called a 'guilty delay' in making the decision. The opposition affirmed that Italy's dignity is linked to its respect for international law and its refusal to participate in policies that lead to the death of thousands of civilian victims.

In contrast, the Israeli Foreign Ministry attempted to downplay the Italian move, describing the agreement as merely a memorandum of understanding lacking real substance. Observers believe that this contradiction in the Israeli response reflects the extent of discomfort over losing an important European ally amid Tel Aviv's increasing international isolation.

The impact of the decision extends to the European level, where voices within the European Parliament have risen to demand the suspension of the comprehensive partnership agreement between the European Union and Israel. European parliamentarians called for an end to what they described as 'complicity' with parties accused of committing grave violations that may amount to genocide.

Italy's stance is part of a series of similar European positions, with Germany imposing a partial arms ban, and countries like Spain, the Netherlands, and Belgium adopting restrictive measures. These collective moves reflect a growing recognition that the Palestinian issue has become the true measure of the international system's justice and the credibility of commitment to human rights.

From a legal perspective, the Italian decision can be read as a precautionary step consistent with the rules of international responsibility that prohibit states from providing aid in unlawful acts. Continued military cooperation in the presence of indications of grave violations of international humanitarian law could expose Italian officials to future legal accountability.

Judicial developments in the International Court of Justice reinforced this trend, placing states under clear obligations to prevent contribution to international crimes. Accordingly, the Italian decision is no longer merely a circumstantial political maneuver but has become a legal necessity to avoid indirect involvement in armed conflicts and related violations.

In conclusion, Meloni's decision represents a glimmer of hope for human rights forces, confirming that the accumulation of popular pressure can bring about real change in the positions of major powers. With continued settlement expansion and military operations in Gaza and Lebanon, the question remains about the readiness of other European capitals to take effective steps beyond diplomatic condemnations.

Given the current situation, the government has decided to suspend the automatic renewal of the defense agreement with Israel.