The Israeli occupation army announced on Saturday morning the detection of a missile launch from Yemeni territory for the first time, amidst the ongoing American-Israeli aggression against Iran. This field development came just hours after statements by Houthi leaders affirming their full readiness to engage in direct confrontation if the targeting of Tehran and the components of the Axis of Resistance in the region continues.

Field data indicates that any direct intervention by the group could lead to widespread disruptions in international maritime navigation, especially around the Arabian Peninsula. This concern arises at a time when global trade is suffering from the repercussions of the near-complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz, making the Red Sea a strategic conflict arena that could deepen the global economic crisis.

Al-Houthi group is a military and political movement rooted in northern Yemen, where it fought years of guerrilla warfare against the Yemeni army before dramatically expanding its influence after the events of 2011. The group managed to seize control of the capital Sana'a in 2014, leading to a Saudi-led military intervention the following year to try to restore legitimacy, a conflict that has resulted in the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

Throughout the years of conflict, the Houthis have demonstrated advanced capabilities in using ballistic missiles and drones, with their attacks targeting vital oil installations and infrastructure deep within Saudi and Emirati territory. Despite the UN-sponsored truce since 2022, the group has maintained its military readiness and significantly developed its arsenal, affirming the independence of its military decision-making from any external parties.

The Houthis' name became closely associated with the regional conflict following the events of October 7, 2023, when they began launching attacks on Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea in support of the Gaza Strip. The United States and Israel responded by launching airstrikes targeting the group's positions in Yemen, in an attempt to deter attacks that directly affected global supply chains passing through the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

Houthi attacks had seen a period of relative calm after the ceasefire reached in October 2025 between Israel and Hamas, mediated by the US. However, the outbreak of direct confrontation between Washington and Tel Aviv on one hand, and Iran on the other, in February 2026, reignited the Yemeni front with the latest missile launch detected by the occupation army.

In a televised speech, the group's leader, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, affirmed that his forces are on high alert, indicating that 'hands are on the trigger' awaiting the outcome of field developments. Al-Houthi stressed that the group will not stand idly by in the face of what he described as escalation against the Islamic Republic, warning that any expansion of hostile alliances would be met with a firm and direct response.

The Houthi group differs from other factions of the Axis of Resistance in that it does not adhere to the direct religious authority of the Iranian Supreme Leader, despite significant political and military convergence. Experts believe that the group primarily acts according to a Yemeni national agenda, but finds in its alliance with Tehran and Hezbollah a means to strengthen its regional position and confront the international pressures imposed on it.

The United States accuses Iran of providing the Houthis with funding, training, and advanced weapons with the help of Lebanese Hezbollah experts, which the group consistently denies. The Houthis affirm that they rely on their self-capabilities in developing missiles and drones, considering that accusing them of subservience to Iran aims to internationalize the Yemeni conflict and justify external interventions in their affairs.

Attention is now focused on the potential paths the Houthis might take amidst the current escalation, as analysts believe the group may resort to scattered and surprise attacks to confuse opponents. This could include targeting the interests of countries that allow their territories or territorial waters to be used for attacks against Iran, raising the probability of a comprehensive and unprecedented regional confrontation.

Threatening to close shipping lanes represents the strongest card in the Houthis' hand, as disrupting navigation in the Red Sea could paralyze the export of oil and gas from Gulf countries. The group stated that it is ready to act if the Red Sea is used as a launchpad for hostile operations against Tehran, which puts international navigation at the mercy of rapid developments, in the absence of any horizon for a diplomatic solution to end the interconnected series of wars from Gaza to Tehran and Sana'a.

The Houthis demanded an immediate and comprehensive cessation of all military operations in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen, as a fundamental condition for de-escalation in the region. Military spokesman Yahya Saree warned that the continued siege on the Yemeni people and its linkage to regional developments would lead to harsh reactions beyond expectations, emphasizing that the target bank is expanding to include vital and distant interests.

Reports confirm that the American-Israeli aggression against Iran, which began late last February, has pushed all factions of the Axis of Resistance to review their defensive and offensive strategies. The latest Yemeni move comes as a clear message that the southern front of the occupation will not be safe, and that the rules of engagement have fundamentally changed with the entry of long-range Yemeni missiles into active service.

In conclusion, the situation in Yemen remains organically linked to the trajectory of the major confrontation in the region, where the Houthis represent a difficult number in the regional military equation. With continued warnings of an explosion of the situation, international waterways remain at the mercy of rapid developments, in the absence of any horizon for a diplomatic solution to end the interconnected series of wars from Gaza to Tehran and Sana'a.

Our hands are on the trigger regarding escalation and military action at any moment developments require.

By: Sidqi Abu Dhair / Researcher and Consultant in Digital Media and Marketing

Politics is no longer made only in decision-making rooms, and the shaping of public opinion is no longer exclusive to parties or traditional media. Instead, the center of gravity has shifted to a more complex and dangerous space: the realm of digital platforms. In this space, power is not measured by the number of votes or political programs, but by the algorithms' ability to direct attention, reorder priorities, and create collective perception in an invisible way. This is where the features of what can be called "the technology of politics" begin, where the algorithm transforms from a technical tool into an undeclared political actor.

In the Palestinian context, this transformation cannot be read in isolation from the general context in which society lives. A reality characterized by political and economic pressure, and daily restrictions, makes the digital space not just a communication area, but an alternative space for life and expression. This explains the deep integration of Palestinians into digital platforms, not only as a means of entertainment, but as an environment that provides a relative sense of freedom and control, even if this feeling is manufactured within a precise algorithmic structure.

However, the problem does not start with usage, but with the nature of the system that manages this usage. Algorithms do not operate according to the logic of truth or public interest, but according to the logic of interaction. They do not ask who is right, but rather what makes the user stay longer and interact more. In this sense, the most intense, angry, and provocative content becomes the most widespread, not because it is the most accurate, but because it is the most capable of attracting attention. Over time, the platform no longer reflects reality, but reshapes it.

Here arises the most sensitive question: Are we facing a natural effect of technology, or a new form of digital hegemony? The answer cannot be simplistic, because digital platforms today are not neutral entities, but structures owned by companies and states that have the ability to control data, algorithms, and infrastructure. This ability gives them unprecedented influence in shaping consciousness, not by imposing a direct discourse, but by controlling what appears and what is hidden, what is amplified and what is ignored. Multiple studies have indicated that artificial intelligence is capable of guiding public opinion through highly customized content, based on analyzing user behavior, which transforms influence from a traditional media process into a deep cognitive engineering process.

In this context, societies suffering from political or economic fragility appear more susceptible to influence. Palestine is no exception, but a clear example. A young society, highly digitally connected, living under constant pressure, and looking for a space for expression or even escape, finds itself within an algorithmic environment that gradually reshapes its consciousness. This does not mean a direct conspiracy as much as it means an environment ready for influence, where psychological need meets algorithmic design.

And here we reach the core of the hypothesis: Is the disagreement within Palestinian society truly based on a real difference of opinion, or is it digitally reproduced? The reality is that disagreement inherently exists in any society, but platforms do not merely reflect it; they amplify, accelerate, and recycle it. The user does not see the full picture, but rather what aligns with their inclinations, creating closed digital bubbles that reinforce convictions instead of testing them. Over time, discussion transforms from a space for dialogue into a space for conflict, and from natural disagreement into sharp polarization.

More dangerously, this influence is not exerted directly, but through what can be called "attention steering." The platform does not tell you what to think, but it decides what you see, when you see it, and with what intensity. What is displayed intensely becomes normal, and what is hidden fades from consciousness. Here, control over content transforms into control over perception, and thus into the shaping of attitudes. Moreover, recommendation algorithms are capable of building complete behavioral paths for the user, starting from interest and ending with adoption, without them feeling that they have been subjected to any external influence.

Nevertheless, the user cannot be absolved of responsibility. We do not just consume content; we produce it, re-share it, and reinforce it with our interaction. The data we leave daily turns into raw material used to analyze and influence us. In other words, we are not only influenced by algorithms, but partners in feeding them. We train the system that reshapes us, and we give it the ability to understand us more deeply than we sometimes understand ourselves.

In the end, politics cannot be separated from technology in the digital age, especially in a context like Palestine. The battle is no longer just on the ground, but over consciousness. It is no longer just about political decisions, but about individuals' perception of what is happening around them. The real danger is not in the existence of disagreement, but in this disagreement turning into an algorithmic product that is managed, amplified, and continuously reproduced, far from any unifying national project.

The question we must ask today is not who is right, but who determines what we see so that we can decide who is right. Because whoever has the ability to shape the digital landscape necessarily has the ability to influence consciousness, and whoever has consciousness, owns the future.

While the world is preoccupied with the American-Israeli war against Iran and the regional tensions associated with the confrontation, a profound process of change is accelerating on the ground in the occupied West Bank, taking place away from the spotlight. As attention turns to the battlefields, the Israeli occupation government is exploiting this international preoccupation to deepen its policies of control over the land in the West Bank, through a combination of governmental decisions, settlement expansion, and organized settler terrorism against Palestinians.

What is referred to in the official discourse of the Israeli occupation state as "settler terrorism" is no longer a marginal phenomenon or acts of hooliganism carried out by a limited number of hilltop youth. The accumulated data and information in recent years, along with investigations published by Israeli, Palestinian, and international human rights organizations and the Israeli press, clearly indicate that these attacks have become part of a broader political and security system that is practically reshaping the geographical and demographic reality in the occupied West Bank.

The investigation published by "Haaretz" last Friday paints a disturbing picture of the collapse of the security and legal oversight system, which had, even partially, controlled these attacks. However, what is happening in reality cannot be understood as a fleeting phenomenon, but rather as an old policy that has deepened significantly with the rise of the current right-wing settlement government.

According to testimonies from officers and reserve soldiers who served in the West Bank, settler terrorism is no longer merely exceptional incidents but has transformed into a near-daily pattern. In many cases, soldiers arrive at the scene of attacks after they have occurred, only to find themselves in a clash between settlers and Palestinians, often ending with the arrest of Palestinians or the use of force against them.

But the problem is much deeper than mere security negligence. Settler terrorism is no longer a random act but has become a field tool within a broader strategy aimed at imposing new realities on the ground. Instead of dozens of hilltop youth, as the occupation government claims, the investigation speaks of hundreds participating in the attacks, operating within a wide support network that includes settlement outposts, settlement farms, and regional councils in the West Bank.

Some of these groups even publish monthly reports on their activities, boasting about burning Palestinian homes and vehicles, destroying olive trees, and assaulting residents of neighboring villages. This reflects an unprecedented degree of organization and implicit legitimization of this type of terrorism.

More dangerously, there is an increasing overlap between settlers and the military system. Some participants in the attacks move in military or semi-military vehicles, wear parts of military uniforms, and carry weapons obtained through regional defense systems. With the expansion of settler armament in recent years, the line between armed civilians and the Israeli army has become more blurred.

In this sense, settlers are gradually transforming into a paramilitary force operating in the field, enjoying army protection and sometimes moving under its direct supervision.

Politically, this transformation cannot be understood without considering the profound changes within the current Israeli occupation government. Finance Minister and Minister in the Ministry of Defense responsible for civil administration in the West Bank, Bezalel Smotrich, is clearly pushing for the implementation of his vision known as the "Decisive Plan," which he proposed in 2017.

This plan is based on expanding Israeli control over areas classified as "C," which constitute about 60% of the West Bank's area, while keeping Palestinians confined within population enclaves in areas "A" and "B." Within this framework, settler terrorism becomes a field tool to impose a new demographic reality.

Repeated attacks on Palestinian villages, burning crops, destroying water sources, and preventing herders from accessing pastures are not just isolated incidents but tools aimed at creating an expelling environment for Palestinian residents, especially in rural areas, the Jordan Valley, and south Hebron.

In contrast, the ability or willingness of Israeli law enforcement agencies to confront this phenomenon has declined. The occupation police in the West Bank, under the influence of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, are facing increasing criticism for their failure to investigate settler attacks. The role of the Israeli General Security Service (Shin Bet) in monitoring what is known as "Jewish terrorism" has also diminished.

However, what appears to be negligence on the surface often reflects alignment with the current government's directives. The Israeli army, which in previous statements described some settler practices as "Jewish terrorism," now finds itself part of a political and security reality that pushes it to avoid confrontation with settlers.

Furthermore, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant's decisions to cancel administrative detention orders against settlers, despite their limited use initially, reflect a political trend that limits legal deterrents against these attacks.

These transformations have also been reflected within the military establishment itself. About two hundred reserve soldiers signed a letter to the military leadership warning of the erosion of the values on which the army is supposed to be based, and of the involvement of some soldiers in acts of violence against Palestinians or in condoning them.

However, this ethical discourse clashes with a different reality on the ground. The army itself carries out daily incursions and arrests in Palestinian cities and villages, and provides protection to settlers during or after their attacks. This contradiction between discourse and practice reveals the limits of the military establishment's ability or willingness to confront settler terrorism.

What is forming today in the West Bank is not merely an escalation in settler terrorism, but a gradual re-engineering of the political and geographical reality. Settlers move with almost complete freedom, while the security system appears hesitant or unable to control them, while the political leadership pushes for expanding control over the land and implementing creeping annexation policies.

In this sense, settler terrorism becomes a tool within a broader policy to reshape the demographic map of the West Bank. It is a systematic and slow process, based on pushing Palestinians to shrink into isolated population enclaves, in contrast to the continuous expansion of the settlement project, and establishing a new reality that serves Israel's strategic and political goals.

Amidst the devastating war on the Gaza Strip and escalating regional tensions, the West Bank appears to be a parallel arena for a profound process of change taking place away from the spotlight. While the humanitarian tragedy in Gaza continues, policies of control over the land are accelerating in the West Bank through a combination of governmental decisions, settler terrorism, and institutional complicity, to entrench a reality based on Israeli superiority and the de facto annexation of lands.

The final result is not merely settlement expansion, but the entrenchment of a system based on gradual annexation, ethnic superiority, and the gradual expulsion of Palestinians from their land, while the official occupation institutions and their security and political arms remain present to support and practically and directly participate in this project.

When a voice that called for dignity and awakened a sense of belonging in people falls silent, the departure is not merely a fleeting event, but a moment of deep reflection on the essence of the legacy left behind. Thus departs Ahmed Kaabour, the author of the poem 'I Call Out to You,' which became an anthem for the Palestinian and Arab conscience, his voice remaining a testament to the power of words to create an awareness that resists breaking.

In the presence of this absence, the question of the secret behind the steadfastness of nations is not an intellectual luxury, but an extension of a humanitarian call that believed that the weak, when they cling to their dignity, refuse defeat. From here, the reading opens up to an attempt to understand the hidden power that makes societies resist and remain standing despite the imbalance of material power.

Some contemporary historical facts seem thought-provoking; the Taliban stood firm against the most violent military power in the world, represented by the United States and NATO. In Palestine, Hamas confronts the Israeli occupation and has managed to shake the myth of an army long described as invincible, despite the enormous technological disparities.

These examples, in addition to the Iranian case facing international isolation and direct threats, raise a fundamental question about the source of this capability. While central regimes collapse with astonishing speed, as happened in Iraq previously, these local forces show a superior ability to persist and engage in long-term confrontation.

A superficial explanation might limit the reason to 'patriotism' alone, but love of land is not enough to explain steadfastness against militarily and numerically superior forces. There is a deeper matter that fuels this determination, which is the societal, cultural, and religious dimension that gives these forces an existential meaning that transcends the defense of geographical borders.

In the Afghan case, we find a social dynamic based on a solid tribal and faith-based network that views resistance as a duty to impose its authentic values. The individual there feels part of a historical project that connects faith in divine power with societal duty towards family and land, making defeat an unthinkable option.

As for Palestine, resistance represents a response to a deep sense of historical injustice extending from the Nakba of 1948 to the present day. The Palestinian people experience steadfastness as a moral and national duty, where small victories turn into legends that nourish the morale of successive generations and create a sense of capability despite the siege.

Palestinian steadfastness is a collective experience shared by all generations, resulting from a mixture of historical awareness and belief in the justice of the cause. This belief gives resistance a dimension that transcends international laws and transient policies, making staying on the land an act of struggle in itself.

The Iranian regime represents another model, where the leadership builds its policies on an extended national identity supported by a deep religious dimension that links the nation to a common destiny. Power here lies not only in the arsenal of weapons but in transforming the conflict into a collective cultural project that views standing against hegemony as a moral duty.

In contrast, we find that hierarchical systems that rely on absolute individual authority collapse as soon as the head of the hierarchy falls. The absence of a cohesive social network and a shared faith-based project makes individuals lack a sense of continuous responsibility, leading to the disintegration of the state in the face of the first serious military test.

True steadfastness stems from the blending of national elements with a spiritual and cultural dimension that gives societies an invisible strength. This strength makes peoples see themselves as part of a project larger than mere material survival, which motivates them to confront injustice even if the adversary is materially and technologically superior.

These models teach us a human lesson that steadfastness is the product of social and spiritual complexity where identity intertwines with history. Defending dignity becomes an existential project, which explains how resource-limited societies can confront formidable international powers and continue to refuse submission.

Ultimately, steadfastness transforms from an exceptional heroic choice into a simple daily act repeated in people's stories and faces. It is a silent will that chooses each time to endure pain and not surrender to invaders, believing that what is preserved within is what makes continuity possible.

This is not a story of an invincible military force, but a story of human dignity that refuses to be violated, no matter how long the road and how many wounds. Enduring pain is always easier than being held captive by humiliation, and this is the golden rule that preserves societies' survival in the face of political storms and wars.

Steadfastness is not merely military capabilities, but the product of social, cultural, and spiritual complexity where nationalism intertwines with religious identity.

International and regional attempts to reshape the Middle East region according to the interests of external powers continue, while there is a striking absence of the indigenous people in shaping their own destiny. The projects that are put forward from time to time, whether European, American, or Israeli, aim essentially to re-engineer influence and suppress independent Arab will.

Throughout the last century, the Arab region experienced diverse renaissance movements, beginning with the nationalist current that called for unity, then socialist propositions, leading to Islamic awakening movements. However, these paths ended in faltering outcomes, leaving the Arab arena in a state of shocking intellectual and political vacuum that threatens the existence of states and the future of their peoples.

The state of paralysis suffered by joint Arab institutions, foremost among them the League of Arab States and the Arab Maghreb Union, reflects the depth of the current predicament. This institutional vacuum is what tempts regional and international powers to dominate, and pushes some of them to revive expansionist dreams such as the 'Greater Israel' project or to strengthen Iranian and international hegemony.

The current historical moment is considered the most dangerous for the region since the end of World War II, as a deep internal predicament converges with a real external threat. Arab elites, whether in power or opposition, bear the greatest responsibility for this comprehensive decline that has made the region an arena for settling scores between major powers.

Today, there is an urgent need to revive a new Arab project characterized by wisdom and realism, and responsive to the aspirations of rising generations who are looking for a clear compass. This required revival demands political imagination that rebels against the state of frustration and defeat, and formulates a vision that inspires peoples and motivates them towards common construction, away from ideological polarization.

Arab elites must transcend traditional conflicts and engage in a comprehensive de-escalation strategy aimed at creating an environment for building a 'national community' based on citizenship and pluralism. This move is not an intellectual luxury, but a national duty imposed by the existential threats lurking over Arab states in their entity and stability.

The absence of a guiding idea for Arab societies leaves individuals in a state of bewilderment and loss, which facilitates the dismantling of Arab political cohesion and the collapse of defensive immunity. This vacuum is the most dangerous recipe for handing over future generations to marginal cultures that lose their connection to their fateful issues and civilizational identity.

Despite the gloom, inspiring models of steadfastness and resistance emerge, as in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian people provide a living example of adherence to rights. However, this model still needs a broader Arab context that links the culture of resistance with the culture of construction and comprehensive advancement to ensure the sustainability of its impact.

Many voices demand the necessity of conducting comprehensive critical reviews of the paths of political and social forces that dominated the scene in past decades. Liberating oneself from the illusions of the past and rehashing its events is the first step towards formulating a renaissance project capable of emulating the complex reality and its accelerating challenges.

It is no longer acceptable for Arab elites to remain dependent on old visions formed under different temporal circumstances and no longer capable of providing solutions to today's crises. The acceleration of international transformations requires renewed minds that understand the intertwining elements of power in the modern world and are skilled in maneuvering to protect supreme Arab interests.

Squandering the region's resources and history for the benefit of the greedy represents a crime against future generations who deserve to live in a stable and sovereign region. It cannot be accepted that the Arab map remains merely an area for redistributing influence among international powers seeking to consolidate their strategic superiority at the expense of our peoples.

The new international system currently forming, with its multilateral characteristics and balance of power, offers a golden opportunity for Arabs to reposition themselves outside traditional axes. Political intelligence requires investing in these transformations to forge broader horizons that guarantee Arabs a place under the sun in a world that respects only the strong and organized.

Arab regimes and peoples face a decisive moment that requires courage in decision-making and clarity in defining strategic goals for the next stage. Active engagement in shaping the future is the only way out of the cycle of dependency that has lasted for long decades and exhausted the foundations of advancement.

In conclusion, Arabs must realize that they possess all the human and geographical components to be an active part of international negotiations on the future of the global system. The choice today is between being partners in drawing the new map, or remaining merely a meal on the table of negotiating powers that only consider their own interests.

It is not the destiny of this region to be, once again, a century after the first division, a map for the division and redistribution of influence among external powers.

British writer David Hearst considered the American-Israeli war on Iran, now entering its second month, to be the culmination of strategic failure built on misinformation. Hearst pointed out in an article that the military decision was not linked to the course of negotiations, but was based on intelligence illusions about the ease of overthrowing the Iranian regime from within.\n\nThe article revealed a pivotal role for Mossad director David Barnea, who presented reports to Netanyahu claiming the agency's ability to mobilize the Iranian opposition for a coup immediately after the start of aerial bombardment. These assessments prompted US President Donald Trump to proceed with the attack, ignoring warnings from other intelligence agencies that questioned the accuracy of these predictions.\n\nOn the ground, sources confirmed that the initial aerial attack resulted in the death of former Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the injury of his son Mojtaba, in addition to the elimination of dozens of generals. Despite the heavy losses in the Iranian air force and defenses, Tehran began a disproportionate response that has not stopped since the first hour of the aggression.\n\nHearst quoted Mohamed ElBaradei, former Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as saying that what is happening today is an exaggerated version of the deception that preceded the invasion of Iraq in 2003. ElBaradei explained that claims about Iran being close to possessing nuclear weapons reminded him of the lies promoted by the Bush administration about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.\n\nElBaradei expressed his deep sorrow over the collapse of the international system, noting that Western powers have lost their moral and legal compass. He stressed that ignoring the decisions of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court regarding Gaza and Iran sends a catastrophic message to the countries of the Global South that security can only be achieved by force.\n\nThe article touched upon recent American military movements, as flight data monitored the transfer of massive forces to Israel and Jordan in preparation for a possible ground operation. Hearst believes that this escalation reflects Trump's and Netanyahu's desire to reshape the region by brute force, far from any diplomatic or legal frameworks.\n\nIn the context of the Iranian response, Tehran succeeded in paralyzing a fifth of global oil and gas trade by targeting American bases and oil tankers and closing the Strait of Hormuz. The first weeks of the war proved that Iran is still capable of maintaining a continuous flow of missiles and drones despite the painful blows it received.\n\nElBaradei strongly criticized the assassination of political figures and negotiators, citing the recent killing of Ali Larijani in an Israeli raid, describing him as a man with whom negotiations could have been held. He considered that turning genocide and the assassination of journalists and philosophers into acceptable tools of war represents the end of the era of international law.\n\nThe article also drew attention to attempts to undermine the International Criminal Court from within, especially after the acquittal of Prosecutor Karim Khan from misconduct charges. Diplomatic sources explained that there are ongoing efforts by some parties to prevent Khan from resuming his duties, in an attempt to obstruct the prosecution of Israeli leaders.\n\nElBaradei warned that the feeling of injustice and oppression in the Arab world will inevitably lead to a new explosion, stressing that the spirit of the Arab Spring has not died. He pointed out that the absence of equality and political freedom, coupled with the persecution of peoples, are sufficient reasons for the outbreak of future revolutions that cannot be stopped.\n\nRegarding the European position, Hearst believes that Europe has marginalized itself in major conflicts from Gaza to Lebanon and Iran. He warned that the collapse of the American empire would leave Europe without military protection and without the strong international institutions it previously relied on.\n\nElBaradei described the current situation as a "war on science and logic," where the United States withdraws from international organizations and climate agreements while crises ignite. He indignantly questioned the role of the completely paralyzed UN Security Council in the face of what is happening in Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran, describing it as an empty forum.\n\nHearst concluded his article by emphasizing that Trump and Netanyahu are "burning the candle at both ends," and that the consequences of their actions will ultimately affect everyone. He pointed out that ignoring the rules of war today will open the door for future enemies to apply the same brutal rules against the West, its cities, and its hospitals.\n\nThis comprehensive regional war, according to the analysis, aims not only to change regimes but to fragment an entire geopolitical landscape and reshape it according to a unilateral vision. With continued bombing and destruction, the question remains about the exorbitant human cost that millions will pay in a conflict that may surpass in its brutality everything the region has witnessed in recent decades.\n\nHistory does not just repeat itself in the war on Iran, but it magnifies itself in the complete absence of international law.

Washington Message

28/3/2026

In a notable move reflecting escalating debate within the United States regarding its Middle East policy, US Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib announced on March 27, 2026, the introduction of a legislative package in the US House of Representatives aimed at halting US support for Israeli military operations in southern Lebanon. This initiative comes amidst an escalation of Israeli military operations against Hezbollah, following an incident that occurred in late February.

The legislative package consists of two main bills that reflect an escalating tone in the political discourse opposing US military support for Israel. The first is a House resolution declaring solidarity with the Lebanese people in the face of what Tlaib described as "illegal invasion, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing." The resolution calls for an immediate cessation of military operations, rejection of any threats of illegal occupation, and calls for international investigations into potential violations, as well as support for the return of displaced Lebanese to their areas.

The second bill is a resolution based on the War Powers Act, aiming to compel the US administration to withdraw any direct or indirect military support for ongoing operations in Lebanon. This includes halting assistance in military targeting or intelligence sharing with Israel, which, if passed, would represent a radical shift in the nature of US involvement in the conflict.

In justifying her move, Tlaib leveled sharp accusations against Israel, considering that it is applying in Lebanon what she described as a "genocide playbook," similar to what she claims happened in the Gaza Strip. She also held the United States directly responsible, asserting that these operations "would not have happened without US support funded by taxpayer money," calling for a comprehensive ban on arms exports to Israel.

Tlaib's statements indicate growing concern about the targeting of civilian infrastructure in southern Lebanon, where she spoke of widespread destruction of villages and mass displacement of residents. These allegations align with circulating reports of escalating airstrikes and ground operations, in the context of the ongoing confrontation with Hezbollah, further complicating the regional scene and raising fears of an expanding conflict.

Conversely, this initiative is expected to face strong opposition within Congress, given the continued traditional support for Israel by both Republican and Democratic parties, although this consensus is gradually eroding, especially within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. This move is also likely to spark a broad debate about the limits of the President's powers in managing foreign military operations, and the role of Congress in curbing them.

This move comes at a sensitive political moment, as internal pressures on the US administration are increasing to re-evaluate its policy towards conflicts in the Middle East, amidst growing criticism from human rights organizations and political circles that see unconditional support for Israel undermining US credibility on the international stage.

Rashida Tlaib's initiative reflects a significant shift in political discourse within the United States, where criticism is no longer confined to academic or human rights circles, but is now embodied in tangible legislative actions. This shift indicates the growing influence of the progressive current that seeks to redefine the relationship with Israel on human rights and legal grounds. However, the success of this initiative remains limited given the balance of power within Congress, making it more of an attempt to change public debate rather than bring about immediate policy change, yet its cumulative impact could be profound.

The War Powers Resolution also raises fundamental questions about the nature of US involvement in foreign conflicts and the limits of executive authority in providing military support without explicit authorization. Historically, Congress has rarely succeeded in imposing effective restrictions on this type of involvement, but the escalating debate over the political and moral cost of military support may revive this role. In this context, the initiative is not only about Lebanon but represents a broader test of the ability of American institutions to rebalance power between the legislative and executive branches on issues of war and peace.

Regionally, this initiative may contribute to strengthening the discourse rejecting US support for Israel, but at the same time, it may intensify political polarization within the United States. While its supporters see it as a necessary step to hold military policies accountable, its opponents consider it a threat to strategic relations with Israel. This division reflects deeper shifts in American public opinion, especially among younger generations, who are becoming more critical of traditional policies. Therefore, the importance of this step lies in its long-term political implications, more than its direct legislative outcomes.

Informed sources reported that 12 American soldiers were injured in an attack targeting Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia on Friday. Officials confirmed that the attack was carried out by missiles and drones launched as part of a new wave of escalation in the region, resulting in injuries of varying severity among the forces stationed there.

Initial medical reports indicate that two of the injured soldiers are in critical condition, while eight others sustained serious injuries requiring urgent medical intervention. The health status of the remaining injured is still under continuous assessment and monitoring within the base's medical facilities, amid a widespread security alert.

Media sources revealed that the joint attack caused significant material damage to military air equipment, with two KC-135 refueling aircraft suffering extensive destruction. Satellite images showed the extent of the damage caused by the shelling inside the runways of the vital air base.

This targeting comes in the context of direct military confrontations that have erupted since late February between Iran on one hand, and Israel and the United States on the other. The parties are exchanging missile and air strikes, with Tehran targeting what it describes as American interests and sites in the region in response to ongoing military operations against it.

Sources explained that the attack occurred while soldiers were carrying out their routine duties inside the base, where they were surprised by at least one missile followed by swarms of suicide drones. This strike is considered one of the most accurate and impactful attacks on air defense systems stationed at military sites in the region.

In a related context, military data stated that the number of injured in the US Army since the outbreak of war with Iran has exceeded 300 soldiers. Although 273 of them have returned to active duty, the recurrence of these attacks raises concerns about the safety of forces deployed in overseas bases.

Official statistics recorded the deaths of 13 American soldiers since the start of combat operations, which puts the US administration under increasing pressure to deal with growing missile threats. Prince Sultan Air Base has been a frequent target recently, with this attack being the second targeting of the base in just a few weeks.

The same base was subjected to a previous attack on March 5, which resulted in damage to five military aircraft and the death of an American soldier who later succumbed to his wounds. This series of attacks confirms the determination of the attacking parties to cripple the air and logistical capabilities of US forces in strategic bases.

For its part, a number of countries condemned the targeting of civilian objects and international interests, warning of the region sliding into an uncontrollable comprehensive conflict. Affected capitals are demanding an immediate halt to these attacks, which now threaten regional security and the safety of air and land corridors in Arab countries hosting forces.

This attack is considered one of the most dangerous strikes suffered by US air defenses since the start of the war.

Palestinian medical sources announced on Friday evening the martyrdom of 15-year-old child Adham Sayed Saleh Dahman, who succumbed to injuries sustained from Israeli occupation army bullets. The incident occurred during a military raid targeting the Dheisheh refugee camp, located south of Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank.

The Ministry of Health clarified that child Dahman was hit by a live bullet in the abdomen, described as very critical, and was immediately transferred to Beit Jala Governmental Hospital. Despite the medical teams' attempts to save his life, he passed away due to the severe injuries he sustained during the confrontations.

With the martyrdom of child Dahman, the number of martyrs in the West Bank on Friday alone rises to three Palestinians, after the martyrdom of two other citizens aged 22 and 46. The other two martyrs fell during raids carried out by occupation forces in Kafr Aqab town and Qalandia refugee camp, north of occupied Jerusalem.

Official statistics indicate a continuous escalation in the number of victims since October 7, 2023, with the number of martyrs in the West Bank reaching 1138. Medical teams also recorded approximately 11,700 injuries, while the number of detainees in occupation prisons exceeded 22,000 Palestinians during the same period.

In a related context, the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs warned of an imminent danger threatening the Palestinian presence in occupied Jerusalem, specifically in Silwan town. The ministry affirmed that approximately 200 Palestinian families are currently facing the risk of forced displacement and imminent eviction from their homes and properties.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs clarified in an official statement that these families include about 900 Jerusalemite citizens, who are facing lawsuits filed against them by extremist settlement associations. The ministry described these associations as terrorist tools aimed at emptying the city of its indigenous inhabitants for the benefit of settlers.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs strongly criticized the role of the Israeli judicial system, considering that the courts are being used as a legal cover to entrench an illegitimate reality in Jerusalem. It affirmed that these courts grant false legitimacy to the seizure of Palestinian properties and the alteration of the demographic identity of the holy city.

The ministry condemned the escalation of forced evictions, noting the displacement of 15 families from their homes in the Batn al-Hawa area of Silwan town in the past week alone. It also pointed out that the occupation municipality issued immediate and non-appealable demolition orders for seven homes in Qalandia town, further increasing the suffering of the residents.

The Palestinian statement considered that what is happening in Jerusalem falls within a systematic plan to Judaize the city and impose new facts on the ground. The ministry stressed that these measures aim to change the demographic situation in the short term, which necessitates urgent international intervention to stop these violations.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs called on the international community and international organizations to take firm steps to prevent the continuation of the policy of forced displacement. It called for activating diplomatic pressure tools on the occupation authorities to ensure the protection of Palestinian rights and the preservation of the status of the holy city.

The ministry also urged the strengthening of international presence on the ground to monitor Israeli violations and provide protection for the Palestinian people under occupation. It affirmed that all occupation measures in Jerusalem are considered null and void legally and have no legitimate effect.

On the ground, human rights sources reported that settlers seized 13 residential apartments in Silwan town last Wednesday, bringing the total number of seized apartments to 15 within four days. These operations took place under heavy protection from occupation forces, which secured the entry of settlers into the properties.

The Wadi Hilweh Information Center stated that Israeli enforcement and execution department teams began emptying the contents of 11 apartments belonging to the Rajabi family to hand them over to settlers. This had begun with the eviction of the Basbous family from two residential apartments in the same area, amidst a state of extreme tension.

It is worth noting that the 'Ateret Cohanim' settlement association had seized two additional apartments in Silwan early last week. These intensive settlement movements come within the framework of right-wing associations' efforts to control the entire Batn al-Hawa neighborhood overlooking the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Israeli courts are used as a tool to entrench an illegal and unprecedented reality and to give it false legitimacy in the holy city.

A state of anxiety and confusion prevailed among settlers in Tel Aviv after massive flocks of crows were observed flying in unusually dense formations in the sky. This scene coincided with ongoing military operations and missile exchanges, prompting many to document the phenomenon on social media platforms amidst questions about its implications at this critical time.

A segment of observers linked the birds' flight to religious texts from the 'Book of Revelation,' which speak of birds gathering in the sky as a sign preceding major battles and the immense human losses that follow. Discussions also brought up what is known as the 'curse of the eighth decade,' derived from Talmudic interpretations, which refers to radical transformations that the occupation state might face as it approaches eighty years of age.

Interpretations were not limited to the religious aspect; some recalled historical traditions dating back to ancient Roman times, where the movement of birds was seen as encrypted messages warning of impending disasters or the fall of kingdoms. The atmosphere charged with security tension contributed to reinforcing these fears and transforming a natural phenomenon into a subject of political and ideological debate within Israeli society.

In contrast, ornithology experts intervened to calm fears, affirming that the scene carries no mystical dimensions or indicators of imminent disasters. Scientific reports clarified that what happened falls within natural seasonal migration, as hundreds of millions of birds cross Palestinian airspace annually, and this period is the peak activity for some species that prefer to gather in urban areas.

Specialists pointed out that the 'hooded crow,' which is abundant in the region, tends to gather in large flocks during nesting seasons and when searching for food above tall buildings. Despite the logical scientific explanations, the timing of the phenomenon amidst the ongoing war made it a rich subject for the media, reflecting the extent of psychological fragility and anxiety about an unknown future in light of the continuous military escalation.

Some linked the scene to a passage in the Book of Revelation that calls birds to gather for 'the great supper of God' and eat the flesh of the slain after a great battle.

An Israeli was killed and two others sustained varying injuries early Friday morning following an intense Iranian missile attack targeting the greater Tel Aviv area and occupied Jerusalem. Israeli medical sources confirmed that the deceased was a result of a direct hit and shrapnel falling in several vital areas, amidst loud explosions that rocked the center, Jerusalem, and their surroundings.

The Israeli ambulance service reported that it responded to several calls regarding missile shrapnel falling in eight different locations within the greater Tel Aviv area and Jerusalem. These missile barrages caused widespread panic, with rescue teams rushing to affected areas to provide first aid to the injured and assess the material damage resulting from the bombardment.

Meanwhile, Hebrew media reported that one of the missiles directly hit a building in the heart of Tel Aviv, causing significant damage to the site. This coincided with the observation of shrapnel falling in various parts of Jerusalem, indicating the expansion of Iranian targeting to include the political and economic centers of gravity of the occupation.

Field sources explained that the explosions heard in the skies of Tel Aviv were a result of attempts to intercept at least one cluster missile launched from Iranian territory. This type of missile is characterized by its ability to fragment in the air into multiple small projectiles when intercepted, leading to the spread of shrapnel over wide and difficult-to-control areas.

Although cluster munitions may lack the massive destructive power of heavy ballistic missiles, their danger lies in distributing damage across multiple geographical points simultaneously. The falling shrapnel caused damage to civilian property and assets, which further complicated evacuation and rescue operations in populated areas.

Official Israeli statistics indicate a continuous escalation in the human toll since the outbreak of direct confrontation with Iran on February 28th. According to the latest data, the number of Israeli fatalities has reached 22, while the number of injured has exceeded five thousand due to ongoing missile and drone attacks.

These developments come amidst ongoing military operations launched by Israel and the United States against Iranian targets, which Tehran has met with missile responses targeting Israeli depth. Tehran also previously announced targeting what it describes as American interests and bases spread across the region, considering this a legitimate response to the attacks it has faced.

In a related context, several countries in the region expressed their condemnation of the escalating attacks that lead to civilian casualties and damage to non-military facilities. These parties called for an immediate cessation of escalation to avoid the region sliding into a comprehensive war whose regional and international repercussions may not be controllable given the current tension.

The cluster missile exploded and fragmented in the air, causing its shrapnel to fall in multiple areas, resulting in widespread damage.

New York Police, in cooperation with US federal authorities, announced their success in thwarting an imminent criminal plot that targeted the life of American activist of Palestinian origin, Nerdeen Kiswani. This announcement came after the arrest of a young man from New Jersey, in whose home a miniature arsenal of ready-to-detonate incendiary bombs was found, preventing a certain catastrophe.

Security sources explained that the accused is named Alexander Haifley, 26 years old, and was arrested on Thursday evening in the city of Hoboken. An undercover investigator managed to infiltrate digital communication groups that the accused was using to discuss methods of manufacturing incendiary bottles and identify his potential targets, which led security agencies to act quickly before the attack was carried out.

The criminal complaint filed against Haifley indicates that since last February, he began planning to manufacture 'Molotov' bombs under the pretext of self-defense, but investigations proved his intention to direct these explosives towards an address he believed to be the residence of activist Kiswani. The documents also revealed that the accused intended to flee outside the United States immediately after committing his crime, as he modified his travel dates to fit the plan.

For his part, the Federal Prosecutor for the State of New Jersey, Robert Fraser, praised the high coordination between the New York Police and federal agencies, which led to neutralizing this dangerous threat. The accused is scheduled to appear before a federal court in Newark to face heavy charges related to the possession and manufacture of illegal explosive materials intended to harm lives and property.

In her first reaction, Nerdeen Kiswani, who leads the protest group 'Within Our Lifetime,' confirmed that FBI agents contacted her to inform her of the seriousness of the situation she was about to face. Kiswani stressed that these threats will not deter her from continuing her political and human rights activities in support of the Palestinian cause, considering that her voice will remain loud despite attempts at intimidation.

Kiswani is one of the most prominent Palestinian figures in New York who leads demonstrations condemning the occupation, which has exposed her to widespread incitement campaigns by pro-Israel groups accusing her of anti-Semitism. The activist rejects these accusations outright, asserting that her criticisms are directed directly at Israeli policies and state structures, not at any religious or ethnic group.

It is worth noting that this threat comes in the context of legal and field pressures exerted by Kiswani, as she recently filed a lawsuit against the 'Betar USA' organization, accusing it of inciting her persecution and offering financial rewards to those who track her. Judicial authorities in New York had previously forced the aforementioned organization to cease activities described as widespread persecution against activists opposed to Israeli policies.

The FBI informed me that a plot against my life was about to happen, and I will not stop speaking out for the Palestinian people.

The complex relationship between the United States and Iran is subject to a deep conceptual framework that transcends mere traditional geopolitical calculations, with the intense recent use of the term 'absolute evil' emerging. This interpretive framework redefines the Iranian adversary not as a state that can be contained, but as an entity that goes beyond the logic of interests to become an existential threat requiring zero-sum confrontation.

The shift in American political discourse has moved Iran from the category of a regional state with explainable behavior to a metaphysical actor not subject to traditional deterrence rules. This change was not accidental but resulted from the concerted efforts of pressure groups and think tanks that sought to establish a sharp dichotomy precluding any possibility of compromise or gradualism in positions.

Some political literature uses extreme historical comparisons, where Iranian behavior is measured against the model of Nazi Germany, transforming the conflict from a competition for influence into a struggle for survival. This type of framing primarily aims to close the door to diplomacy, as negotiating with an entity described as absolute evil becomes an act lacking political and moral legitimacy.

This approach found wide resonance among currents within the American establishment that, in the post-Cold War era, sought to find an alternative 'strategic enemy'. This imagined enemy provides sufficient justification for the continued American military superiority and widespread global presence, and intersects with the interests of regional allies, primarily Israel, to adjust the balances in the region.

From the perspective of the realist school in international relations, this slide towards sharp moral concepts represents a deviation from political rationality, which assumes that states seek to maximize their security. Researchers like John Mearsheimer argue that dealing with states as uncontainable entities inevitably leads to failed escalatory policies instead of wisely managing the international balance.

Experience has shown that 'maximum pressure' policies based on this perception did not weaken Iran but contributed to strengthening its deterrence motives. This strategic paradox indicates that the inflation of the threat in political discourse makes reality more complex and less containable, leading to continuous confrontational dynamics.

Furthermore, the excessive preoccupation with the Iranian file within this narrow moral framework has led to a massive drain on American strategic resources in the Middle East. This drain came at a sensitive time when the international system is undergoing major transformations, most notably the rapid rise of China and Russia's restoration of its active role on the global stage.

This policy raises fundamental questions about 'opportunity cost', where foreign policy is guided by ideological considerations rather than pure national interests. Reliance on simplistic narratives reduces decision-makers' options and turns manageable crises into open confrontations that do not serve long-term international stability.

Despite the interplay of other factors such as concerns about nuclear proliferation and the security of allies, the dominance of the concept of 'evil' remains the biggest obstacle to any political breakthrough. This concept acts as a filter that prevents seeing realistic shifts in the adversary's behavior and confines interaction to tools of hard power and economic sanctions that often harm civilians.

The true strategic cost lies in the erosion of the strategic thinking structure itself, where complex analysis of international reality is replaced by emotional slogans. This simplification of complex international issues prevents the United States from building a flexible strategy capable of adapting to the rapid regional and international changes in the twenty-first century.

Analysts indicate that overcoming this dilemma requires a strong return to realistic logic that recognizes that all international actors, no matter how great the disagreement with them, remain governed by the logic of interests. Recognizing Iran as a rational political actor seeking its security is the first step towards formulating an effective containment policy away from closed metaphysical classifications.

Extreme moral views in foreign policy lead to a kind of 'strategic blindness', where available diplomatic opportunities are ignored in favor of continuous escalation. This approach does not necessarily weaken the adversary but may push it towards adopting more radical options to protect its existence, increasing the risks of sliding into a comprehensive military confrontation.

Ultimately, the biggest challenge facing Washington remains balancing the protection of its allies' interests with maintaining the stability of the international system without being drawn into costly ideological narratives. Restoring rationality in managing the conflict with Tehran requires political courage to review the assumptions that have governed American discourse for decades.

Building a sustainable strategy in the Middle East requires abandoning 'good and evil' dichotomies in favor of a realistic vision that understands the complexities of the region and its power balances. Without this review, American policy will remain hostage to concepts that hinder its ability to maneuver and drain its status as a great power in a multipolar world.

Negotiating with 'absolute evil' loses its legitimacy within the American conceptual framework and is reinterpreted as weakness or unwarranted concession.

By: Said Arikat

March 28, 2026

News Analysis

Washington, D.C-Somewhere between the tense waters of the Strait of Hormuz and the glowing screens of global trading desks, the basic logic of cause and effect appears to have broken down in President Donald Trump’s approach to the war in Iran. What passes for strategy increasingly resembles improvisation—an erratic cycle of threats, reversals, and narrative manipulation that has yet to produce meaningful diplomatic traction or military clarity. Instead, it has revealed a presidency governing by impulse, not design.

Trump’s latest initiative—a loosely sketched “peace plan” delivered alongside a blunt ultimatum—captures this dysfunction. Accept the terms, he warned, or “we’ll just keep bombing our little hearts out.” The phrasing was cavalier; the substance, even thinner. Tehran dismissed the reported 15-point proposal as maximalist and unserious, while analysts across Washington saw in it neither preparation nor plausibility. There was no evidence of prior engagement, no indication of mutual ground, and no sign that the administration had calibrated its demands to geopolitical reality.

This was not diplomacy. It was theater.

Iran’s response made that unmistakably clear. Rather than engage, Tehran escalated rhetorically, demanding sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz—a move that reframed the conflict as one over regional power and global energy leverage. Far from appearing cornered, Iran signaled that it retains both strategic patience and disruptive capacity. The message was simple: pressure alone will not dictate terms.

Yet even as diplomacy stalled, global markets surged ahead as if resolution were imminent. Stocks climbed, oil prices dipped, and investors appeared willing to take Trump at his word that the conflict would soon end. This is not rational pricing; it is speculative faith. Markets are reacting not to facts, but to presidential assertions—treating rhetoric as reality, even as events on the ground point in the opposite direction.

That disconnect is nowhere more dangerous than in the widening gap between Trump’s words and his administration’s actions. While the president speaks of imminent peace, the Pentagon is quietly preparing for escalation. Elite units, including elements of the 82nd Airborne Division and a Marine expeditionary force, are being repositioned toward the region with capabilities tailored for rapid assault and territorial control. These are not symbolic deployments; they are operational signals. The United States is preparing, quite concretely, for the possibility that diplomacy will fail.

This contradiction—optimism at the podium, escalation in practice—is not merely confusing. It is destabilizing. Strategy requires coherence: a consistent alignment between objectives, messaging, and means. What Trump offers instead is oscillation—ultimatums followed by overtures, threats diluted by sudden talk of dialogue. Each pivot erodes credibility, leaving allies uncertain and adversaries unconvinced.

Even within the administration, there are signs that the original assumptions underpinning the war are beginning to fray. In a striking example, Vice President J. D. Vance reportedly confronted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a tense phone call this week, according to Axios. Vance is said to have pushed back against what he viewed as overly optimistic—and ultimately misleading—Israeli assessments about the ease of triggering regime change in Iran, including expectations that decapitating the leadership, from Ali Khamenei downward, would rapidly unravel the regime. 

The implications are significant. If senior U.S. officials now believe they were sold an overly rosy scenario—one in which military strikes would quickly cascade into political collapse—then the very premise of the strategy is in question. What was framed as a swift, decisive intervention risks hardening into a protracted and unpredictable conflict.

Trump’s subsequent rhetorical pivot toward “negotiations” only deepens the sense of improvisation. Days after issuing a 48-hour ultimatum, he began suggesting that talks were underway, even hinting at undisclosed contacts with Tehran. Yet no credible evidence has emerged to support these claims. Instead, they bear the hallmarks of narrative construction—an attempt to manufacture the appearance of momentum where none exists.

This pattern is familiar: when coercion fails, redefine the narrative; when reality resists, reshape perception.

In Tehran, such signals are unlikely to persuade. Iranian leaders, conditioned by decades of volatile engagement with Washington, see little reason to trust sudden shifts in tone. If anything, the oscillation between threats and overtures reinforces a core belief: that U.S. policy is reactive, inconsistent, and driven more by optics than by strategy. Under those conditions, restraint becomes rational, and delay becomes leverage.

There is also a domestic dimension to Trump’s messaging. By suggesting secret contacts or hinting at divisions within Iran’s leadership, the administration may be attempting to project progress—to signal to domestic audiences that pressure is working, that victory is within reach. But such tactics carry risks. They can mislead not only the public, but policymakers themselves, creating feedback loops in which narrative substitutes for analysis.

What emerges, ultimately, is a policy untethered from strategic discipline. Trump appears to operate on the premise that assertion can shape reality—that by declaring an outcome, he can help bring it into being. It is an approach rooted in branding, not statecraft. And while it may succeed in shaping headlines or buoying markets in the short term, it falters in the face of complex geopolitical systems that do not yield to rhetoric alone.

The consequences are already visible. Diplomatic channels remain blocked. Military risks are rising. Internal doubts are surfacing. And yet the administration continues to project confidence, as though repetition might substitute for results.

The greater danger, however, lies ahead. Wars governed by improvisation rarely end cleanly. Misaligned expectations lead to miscalculations; miscalculations invite escalation. The longer the gap between narrative and reality persists, the more likely it is that events will break through the illusion of control.

And when they do, they will expose not just a plan gone wrong—but a presidency that mistook unpredictability for strategy, and spectacle for strength.

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert urges the International Criminal Court to intervene against settler violence in the West Bank due to what he says has been the failure of Israeli authorities to crack down on the daily phenomenon.

“I have decided not only to not remain silent, but to draw the attention of the ICC in The Hague so that it may take enforcement measures and issue arrest warrants,'” Olmert says in a statement to the Guardian.

The former premier, who has long been critical of the policies of successive governments headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, urges The Hague to prosecute violent settlers who are “assisted, supported and inspired by government circles” as they seek to clear Palestinians from areas in the West Bank with attacks reminiscent of those “once directed against Jews in Europe.”

 “If law enforcement authorities in Israel do not fulfill their duty, perhaps international legal authorities will do what is necessary to save the Palestinians and us from the criminal acts being committed by Jewish terrorists right in front of all our eyes,” Olmert says.

While Olmert urges ICC intervention only in cases of Israeli civilian violence, he laments that “too many” attacks on Palestinians have been committed by Israeli soldiers.

In light of the continuous Palestinian division for years, the crisis is no longer merely a political dispute between factions, but has transformed into a complex situation that has affected various aspects of daily life for Palestinians, from the economy and services to trust in national institutions. With the continuation of this reality, the need arises for a different approach that goes beyond traditional solutions based on power-sharing or temporary agreements, towards a deeper treatment of the roots of the crisis, which opens the door to considering the adoption of a transitional justice path as a comprehensive national entry point for reconciliation.

Transitional justice, as proven by the experiences of many countries, is not just a legal tool, but an integrated framework aimed at addressing the legacy of violations and conflicts through truth-telling, acknowledging mistakes, redressing harm, and reforming institutions. Countries like Morocco, through the Equity and Reconciliation Commission, have succeeded in achieving a delicate balance between the demands of justice and stability, by adopting a comprehensive approach that did not rely on widespread trials as much as it focused on recognition, redress, and rebuilding trust between the state and society.

However, applying these experiences to the Palestinian case cannot be done literally, as Palestine is not experiencing a "post-conflict" phase as in most transitional justice experiences, but rather a dual reality that combines internal division and continued occupation. This complexity imposes additional challenges, most notably the weakness of sovereignty, the duality of institutions between the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the absence of a unified national narrative about the events of the division, in addition to the decline of trust among political actors, and the impact of regional and international factors.

Despite these challenges, transitional justice remains a promising framework if adapted to the Palestinian specificity. True reconciliation cannot be achieved without acknowledging the mistakes committed during the years of division, whether at the political, institutional, or societal level. Ignoring this stage or skipping over it will only lead to the re-production of the crisis in new forms, even if elections or political agreements take place.

It cannot be overlooked that the division is no longer merely an emergency, but has become linked to structures of political and economic interests that arose during its years, which makes overcoming it more complex. Some actors may not see direct interest in reconciliation, which necessitates thinking about realistic incentive mechanisms that encourage engagement in this path, instead of merely calling for it.

In contrast, the continuation of the division does not only mean maintaining the status quo, but entails an increasing political and social cost, represented by the erosion of the legitimacy of institutions, the deepening of the gap between society and the political system, and the decline in the ability to confront external challenges, which makes reconciliation not an ideal option, but an existential necessity.

After the failure of leaders from all factions to overcome divisions, it has become imperative for the Palestinian people to stand up, self-reflect, and hold the past accountable, while looking forward to building a solid political, social, and economic structure, capable of endurance and confrontation. The people, as both the ruler and the affected, are the ones who possess the legitimacy to hold the past accountable, guide the present, and shape a future that reflects their interests and rights, away from factional affiliations and narrow calculations.

One of the most important tools of transitional justice is the establishment of an independent national framework for truth-telling, which allows Palestinian society in all its segments to narrate their experiences and contribute to building a shared collective memory. The absence of a unified narrative makes each party captive to its own narrative, which deepens the division instead of overcoming it. Mutual recognition does not necessarily mean comprehensive legal condemnation, but aims to dismantle the residues of the past and build a new moral foundation for national relations, reflecting that the people are the true ruler and the affected party for whose interest and legitimacy reconciliation must be built.

In addition, reparations constitute a pivotal element in any reconciliation process. The effects of the division were not only political, but also humanitarian, as thousands of citizens were harmed at both individual and collective levels. Therefore, compensation should not be limited to the material aspect, but must include moral and psychological dimensions, restoring to the affected their sense of fairness and dignity, and contributing to their reintegration into public life.

At the institutional level, true reconciliation cannot be discussed without reforming the structures that contributed to entrenching the division. This requires restructuring political, security, and judicial institutions on professional and national foundations, away from factional affiliations, to ensure their neutrality and effectiveness. The continuation of institutions in their current form means that the causes of division remain, even if a political agreement is reached.

However, a fundamental problem arises regarding how to reconcile justice and reconciliation. The call for accountability may raise fears of opening the door to conflicts, while ignoring it may lead to a sense of impunity. Therefore, a flexible approach based on the principle of "recognition in exchange for mitigation" can be adopted, focusing on moral and political responsibility, without sliding into widespread trials that may impede the entire process. The goal here is not revenge, but to learn from the past and prevent the repetition of mistakes.

Moreover, the success of any transitional justice process requires the involvement of all components of Palestinian society, and not limiting it to an agreement between political elites. True reconciliation begins with society, through local dialogue initiatives, promoting a culture of tolerance, and involving youth, women, and marginalized groups in shaping the future. In this context, civil society plays an important role in creating spaces for dialogue, monitoring the implementation of any agreement, and ensuring its continuity.

Furthermore, an entire Palestinian generation grew up under division, without experiencing national unity, which threatens to entrench division as a permanent reality in the collective consciousness, which doubles the importance of urgent action to rebuild a comprehensive national narrative.

On the other hand, the impact of the occupation on this path cannot be ignored, as it constitutes a pressing factor that limits the ability of institutions to operate freely, and affects the entire political environment. However, linking internal reconciliation to the end of the occupation may delay it indefinitely. Therefore, it seems necessary to work on two parallel tracks: addressing internal division on the one hand, and continuing to confront the occupation through political and legal tools on the other.

In this context, elections cannot be seen as a magic solution to the crisis, as any democratic process not based on a genuine national reconciliation base may reproduce division instead of overcoming it, making transitional justice a prerequisite, not an alternative, for any successful democratic path.

Adopting a transitional justice path in Palestine does not mean reaching quick solutions, but requires a gradual approach based on building trust first, then moving to deeper steps. The process may begin with informal dialogues and de-escalation measures, before moving to stages of truth-telling, reparations, and institutional reform. This gradual approach allows for risk reduction, and gives parties an opportunity to test intentions and build common ground.

Ultimately, Palestinian reconciliation is not only about closing the file of the past, but about redefining the relationship between politics and society, and between authority and citizens. It is a moment of testing the ability of the Palestinian political system to transform from managing division to building unity, and from the struggle for power to partnership in the national project. Between these two options, the shape of the Palestinian future is determined, with constant emphasis that the people are the ruler and the affected, and that every reconciliation path must be built for their interest and legitimacy.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has escalated its diplomatic rhetoric towards its neighbors, with its permanent representative to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, directly accusing four Arab countries of facilitating military operations against his country. Sources reported that Iravani sent separate official letters to the UN Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council, concerning Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait, accusing them of opening their airspace and territories to American and Israeli forces.

Iranian messages clarified that these accusations are based on precise monitoring operations and field assessments conducted by the Iranian armed forces during the past period. Tehran affirmed that the United States and Israel continue to exploit the military infrastructure and airspace of these Gulf countries to carry out what it described as 'illegal military operations' targeting Iranian depth, which constitutes a violation of international conventions.

Iran's mission in New York demanded that the mentioned Arab countries adhere to the principles of good neighborliness and fulfill their international responsibilities, which require preventing the use of their territories as a launching pad for hostile acts against other countries. The messages stressed that the continuation of this situation threatens regional stability, calling on the concerned governments to take immediate steps to stop this military cooperation that directly affects Iranian sovereignty.

In a related context, Tehran affirmed that while fully respecting the sovereignty of neighboring countries, it will not hesitate to exercise its legitimate right to self-defense as guaranteed by international law. Sources indicated that the Iranian leadership reserves the right to take all necessary measures to protect its political independence and territorial integrity, in a clear reference to the possibility of expanding the scope of military response to include sources of threat in the region.

This diplomatic move comes amidst an unprecedented military escalation that began last late February, where Israel and the United States launched a series of attacks that resulted in significant human losses among the Iranian leadership. In response, Tehran continues its retaliations by launching drones and missiles, and targeting what it describes as American interests in the region, amid official silence from the four Arab countries regarding the recent accusations leveled against them in the halls of the United Nations.

Iran reserves the right to take all measures, including the right to self-defense, to protect its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence.

A wave of heavy rains caused widespread flooding in the displaced persons' camps in the Gaza Strip, doubling the scale of humanitarian suffering experienced by residents for many months. Field sources reported that the Al-Mawasi area west of Khan Yunis city witnessed the drowning of hundreds of tents, as water infiltrated dilapidated shelters, leaving families exposed without cover or shelter to protect them from the bitter cold.

Under these difficult weather conditions, municipalities in the southern sector face an almost complete inability to provide urgent assistance to those affected due to severe damage to infrastructure. Emergency teams are using old and worn-out machinery in desperate attempts to drain water from roads and tents, but the scale of the disaster far exceeds the available capabilities, which have been depleted by the ongoing Israeli war of extermination on the Strip.

Saeb Laqan, the spokesperson for Khan Yunis Municipality, confirmed that the systematic targeting by the occupation of rainwater drainage networks and sewage lines has made crisis management an impossible task. Laqan explained that the severe shortage of essential equipment and tools limits the ability of rescue teams to intervene effectively, noting that the destruction of main roads has hindered the access of machinery to the most affected areas in the displaced persons' camps.

For their part, displaced persons in the Al-Mawasi area described the situation as tragic, as water submerged their tents all night and damaged their simple belongings and what remained of their blankets and clothes. Citizens indicated that attempts to appeal to civil defense and municipalities did not yield tangible results, given the lack of the minimum necessary capabilities for these entities to deal with the floods caused by the heavy rains.

Despite the ceasefire agreement coming into effect last October, the living conditions of approximately 1.9 million displaced persons have not seen any significant improvement. The Israeli occupation continues to obstruct the entry of relief aid, shelter materials, and new tents, forcing hundreds of thousands of families to remain in dilapidated tents that do not protect from the summer heat or winter cold, amidst a complete absence of basic services.

Official statistics indicate that the Israeli war has caused damage to about 90% of the civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip, in addition to the martyrdom and injury of hundreds of thousands. This massive destruction has made facing weather fluctuations an existential challenge for residents who have lost their homes and now rely on canvas tents in open areas lacking sewage networks or protection from floods.

"The continuation of the war and the targeting of rainwater drainage networks have exacerbated the difficulty of crisis management, and the lack of equipment limits our ability to mitigate the effects of the low pressure system."

The Islamic world today is at a historical turning point, most in need of a unified stance, in light of a brutal aggression targeting Islamic countries and holy sites, foremost among them Al-Aqsa Mosque. Although Al-Aqsa was the primary catalyst for the establishment of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the current reality reveals a complete inability to even convene an emergency meeting to confront the ongoing violations.

Last Ramadan and the subsequent Eid al-Fitr witnessed a dangerous precedent with the prohibition of prayer and the call to prayer (adhan) in Al-Aqsa Mosque, without any movement from official systems. In contrast, we see swift international and regional action from the Arab League and the European Union when certain geopolitical interests are affected, highlighting a clear double standard in dealing with crises.

The deafening silence regarding statements by occupation leaders and the US Department of Defense about targeting all Islamic components reflects a state of political anesthesia that has afflicted the body of the Ummah. This behavior is no longer a mere coincidence; it has become a recurring pattern that reveals a deep structural imbalance in the nature of the regional system, which has replaced the idea of the Ummah with the narrow nation-state.

The first pillar of this impotence lies in the political decision-making of some countries being held hostage by international and security alliance systems led by major powers. These arrangements restrict the positions of states to a specific ceiling that cannot be exceeded, for fear of collision with Western allies who define the limits of permissible action in the region.

Sharp regional polarization also plays a destructive role in fragmenting any collective effort, as conflicts are read from the perspective of influence and interests, not from the perspective of civilizational belonging. Instead of considering aggressions a common threat, they are categorized within axis conflicts, which deprives the issue of its unifying dimension and turns it into material for political polarization.

There is also a deep fear among many regimes of sliding into open confrontations whose economic or political consequences they may not be able to bear. This logic, based on 'risk management' rather than 'conflict leadership,' leads to a preference for silence or gray positions at the expense of principled solidarity with the Ummah's existential issues.

Regional institutions, especially the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Arab League, have transformed into ceremonial structures that merely issue declarative statements that do not translate into actions. This institutional weakness has led to an erosion of people's trust in the ability of these entities to protect common interests or influence international decisions.

What we are witnessing today is a gradual disintegration of the idea of collective action, where a large gap emerges between international blocs that move quickly to protect their interests and an Islamic world that lives in individual reactions. This transformation from an 'Ummah' to 'functional units' within the international system makes states act only when asked to, and remain silent when international necessities dictate.

Sectarian factors and the division among major powers in the region have further complicated the scene, as internal animosity has become a priority over confronting external threats. This fragmentation has made shared identity a burden to be ignored rather than a source of strength and pressure in international forums, thus depriving the Islamic bloc of its strategic weight.

Since the fall of the Ottoman Caliphate, the idea of a 'political Ummah' has faded, replaced by disparate states governed by calculations of survival and internal legitimacy. Many of these regimes face economic and social challenges that make them retreat into themselves, avoiding involvement in external issues that might open new fronts they cannot manage.

The shocking truth is that the world does not respect entities that do not respect the foundations of their existence or seriously defend their holy sites. The speed with which international conferences are convened to protect trade routes or military bases, compared to the slowness in supporting the oppressed, reflects a severe imbalance in the compass of Islamic political decision-making.

This bitter reality is not just a transient 'failure'; it is a logical consequence of profound transformations in the structure of the political system, which has shifted from a logic of solidarity to a logic of numerical calculations. The nation-state has become the sole actor, while the 'Ummah' remains merely an emotional slogan used in speeches without real substance on the ground.

The continuation of this approach will inevitably lead to further weakness and loss of ability to influence the future of the region, opening the door for unofficial forces to fill the void. The absence of will and a shared vision is the real problem, not the lack of resources or capabilities that the Islamic world possesses in various fields.

In conclusion, restoring the civilizational role of the Ummah requires rebuilding the concept of common interests, away from being held hostage by external forces or drowning in internal conflicts. The upcoming challenge lies in how to transform emotional rhetoric into institutional political action that restores the Ummah's prestige and protects its holy sites from continuous encroachment.

What we see today is not just a temporary dereliction; it is a declaration of the death of the idea of joint Islamic action and the transformation of the Ummah into separate islands.

The tragedy of the wounded in the Gaza Strip is embodied in the story of fifty-year-old Alaa Muhammad Hussein, who transformed from a breadwinner for a large family of 25 individuals into a wounded invalid dependent on a wheelchair and walker. Hussein, who was injured by 50 shrapnel fragments from a bomb launched by an Israeli drone in the Tal al-Hawa neighborhood, now lives in a dilapidated tent in Deir al-Balah, battling exacerbated pain in his lungs and neck with no immediate hope of recovery.

Despite Hussein having medical permission to travel to Belgium nine months ago, strict Israeli restrictions at the Rafah crossing prevented him from reaching his treatment destination. This suffering is not limited to him alone; more than 20,000 wounded and sick individuals share it, facing the risk of death amidst the near-complete collapse of the healthcare system within the besieged Strip.

Inside the same tent, his daughter Maisaa (31 years old) is battling breast cancer, which she discovered before the outbreak of the war. However, forced displacement and the destruction of the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital deprived her of receiving chemotherapy doses. Maisaa, a mother of four children, now lives without a clear treatment destination, relying on charitable soup kitchens to secure food for her children after her husband's injury and inability to work.

Official data from the Ministry of Health indicates a catastrophic reality, where only 490 patients have traveled since the reopening of the Rafah crossing last February. These numbers reflect the occupation's failure to adhere to the ceasefire agreement, as the actual implementation rate of provisions related to the travel of humanitarian cases does not exceed 19% of what was agreed upon.

The current ceasefire agreement stipulates allowing 150 patients to travel daily, but the reality on the ground shows deliberate Israeli procrastination that has caused the deaths of 6 to 10 patients daily while on waiting lists. Since the invasion of Rafah city in May 2024, approximately 1,400 patients have lost their lives as a result of being deprived of their basic right to treatment abroad.

Engineer Zaher Al-Wahidi, Director of the Health Information Systems Unit, warned of 195 very serious cases classified as being in 'the end of life,' threatened with death at any moment. The long waiting lists also include approximately 4,000 children and 4,000 cancer patients who need surgical and therapeutic interventions not available in Gaza's exhausted hospitals.

Al-Wahidi explained that the occupation currently allows only 24 cases to travel daily with their companions, a very small number compared to the actual need, which requires the evacuation of 200 to 400 cases daily. This deliberate slowness in procedures means that resolving the current file of the wounded may take years, while patients do not have the luxury of time.

The medical evacuation process involves complex procedures starting with local medical evaluation in Gaza hospitals, where specialized committees sort and classify cases into emergency, urgent, and routine. These lists are uploaded through the electronic 'Sehati' system to ensure the enumeration of numbers and continuous updating of patient data for follow-up with international bodies.

The World Health Organization plays the role of international coordinator in this process, receiving approved lists and presenting them to host countries such as Qatar, the UAE, Turkey, and European countries. Once the patient receives medical approval from the host country, the most complex stage begins: obtaining 'security coordination' from the occupation authorities.

Israeli security approval represents the biggest obstacle, as patients and their companions undergo strict security scrutiny, often leading to the rejection of companions or long delays in travel. This intransigence prevents hundreds of patients from benefiting from medical visas they have already obtained from Arab and foreign countries.

Amidst the continued closure or rationing of work at the crossings, the health condition of the injured worsens, as new repercussions of old injuries such as herniated discs and acute lung infections appear. Doctors confirm that many delicate surgical operations require technical capabilities and equipped operating rooms that are currently not available in the Gaza Strip.

The occupation authorities exploit regional tensions to tighten the noose on the Strip, which directly reflects on the movement of travelers through the Rafah crossing, which is the only outlet for two million Palestinians. This reality has made travel for treatment a distant 'dream,' even for those who have received official medical referrals for more than a year.

The continuation of this systematic policy of obstructing medical evacuation places the international community and human rights organizations before a historical responsibility to stop what human rights activists describe as the 'slow execution' of the wounded. Every day of delay in fully opening the crossing means the loss of lives that could have been saved with simple medical intervention abroad.

The wounded Alaa Hussein and his family, like thousands of others, remain suspended between the hope of travel and the reality of pain, awaiting the moment the crossing opens without security restrictions that kill their dreams of recovery. It is a cry of pain emanating from the tents of the displaced, demanding a simple human right guaranteed by all international laws: the right to treatment and life.

I wish for death instead of being in a wheelchair.. Our lives are unbearable, and every day I feel death approaching me.

Medical sources at Palestine Medical Complex in Ramallah city announced today, Friday, the martyrdom of young man Mustafa Hamad, who succumbed to critical injuries sustained by Israeli occupation army bullets. The fatal injury occurred during the occupation forces' raid on Qalandia refugee camp, located north of occupied Jerusalem, where he was transferred to the emergency department before he breathed his last.

Hundreds of citizens marched in the funeral procession of martyr Hamad from the hospital in an angry procession, during which participants chanted slogans condemning the continuous Israeli crimes against Palestinian camps. Eyewitnesses confirmed that confrontations erupted at the camp entrance immediately after the raid, where Israeli forces used live and rubber bullets and tear gas heavily against the youths.

For its part, the Palestinian Red Crescent Society reported that its teams dealt with two other live bullet injuries to two young men during the violent confrontations in Qalandia camp. Local sources clarified that the occupation deliberately fired directly at the demonstrators who tried to confront the raid targeting the camp's neighborhoods.

In a related context, occupation forces launched a widespread raid campaign in Bethlehem Governorate, targeting Nahalin village, where citizen Raed Ahmed Al-Nis was arrested after searching his home and tampering with its contents. The forces also raided Kisan village east of the city and stormed a number of citizens' homes without any additional arrests being reported there.

Nablus Governorate also witnessed a significant escalation on the ground, as occupation vehicles stormed several residential neighborhoods and the old Askar and Ein camps. The operation resulted in the arrest of Jamal Al-Samhan, Iyad Joudeh, and Moawiya Kamal Rashid, amidst deliberate acts of vandalism targeting citizens' vehicles and private property inside the raided homes.

In Qalqilya city, sources reported that occupation forces raided Kafr Saba neighborhood and arrested citizen Yasser Hammad and his daughter after a thorough search of their home. This coincided with occupation soldiers severely beating a citizen in Duma village south of Nablus, which led to him sustaining injuries and bruises that required his immediate transfer to the hospital for treatment.

The attacks were not limited to the occupation army; groups of settlers attacked a Bedouin gathering in Wadi Al-Awar area south of Hebron. The settlers physically assaulted Palestinian residents in the area and stole a number of sheep, under the protection and security of army forces present at the scene.

Human rights reports indicate a dangerous escalation in settler attacks in the West Bank, where their attacks have caused the death of 8 Palestinians since the end of last February. These attacks come within the framework of a systematic policy aimed at pressuring Palestinians and pushing them towards forced displacement from their lands for the sake of settlement expansion.

Since October 8, 2023, the West Bank has recorded the martyrdom of 1136 Palestinians and the injury of about 11,700 others by occupation and settler bullets. The number of arrests has also reached record figures, exceeding 22,000 cases, including all age groups under harsh detention conditions and international warnings of a deteriorating humanitarian situation.

Political and international circles warn of the Israeli government's intention to proceed with plans to officially annex the West Bank, exploiting global preoccupation with the war on the Gaza Strip. West Bank cities are currently experiencing the worst humanitarian and security crisis since 1967, with the continuation of demolition and settlement policies that undermine any chances for stability in the region.

The West Bank is experiencing an unprecedented escalation, including direct targeting, killing, and widespread arrests since the start of the aggression on the Gaza Strip.

The Middle East region is witnessing a sharp escalation in military tensions, as the United States has begun taking practical steps to deploy elite forces to the Gulf region. These movements come at a time when the Donald Trump administration is seriously considering options for ground intervention against Iran, especially if diplomatic channels reach a dead end.

Informed sources reported that approximately two thousand soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, one of the most prominent elite units in the US Army, have received official orders to prepare and deploy to the region. This step reflects a fundamental shift in US strategy, from complete reliance on air strikes to preparing for the possibilities of direct ground confrontation.

In a related context, press reports, citing officials in the US Department of Defense (the Pentagon), revealed that studies are underway to send massive reinforcements that could amount to an additional 10,000 ground troops. These reinforcements aim to strengthen the US military presence in hot spots and provide the necessary logistical and combat support for any upcoming scenario.

The 82nd Airborne Division is characterized by exceptional capabilities for rapid deployment anywhere in the world in less than 24 hours. These forces have extensive experience in carrying out airborne operations behind enemy lines, and seizing vital locations such as strategic airports and ports to ensure the superiority of subsequent forces.

This division has earned a distinguished military reputation since its participation in World War II, through the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and its recent deployment in Europe. Official statements from the White House confirm that all military options remain on the table, which reinforces the hypothesis of imminent military action.

In parallel with the paratroopers' movement, two amphibious groups comprising approximately 5,000 Marines are moving towards the region. This coordination between air, ground, and naval forces gives military command in Washington high flexibility to carry out ground operations, whether limited in objectives or large-scale.

The Strait of Hormuz stands out as one of the most important strategic targets in any potential confrontation, given that it is a major artery through which about a fifth of the world's oil supplies pass. Concerns are growing that Iran may plant naval mines or threaten navigation, which could lead to wild jumps in global energy prices.

Military estimates indicate that the Iranian island of Qeshm represents a primary target for US forces, as it is believed to contain fortified underground missile bases. Tehran uses these bases and complex tunnel networks to threaten warships and commercial vessels in the Strait, making their control a military necessity.

According to defense sources, any ground operation could begin with intense preparatory fire and precise air strikes using fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets. These strikes would be followed by intensive airborne landings of paratroopers aimed at destroying Iranian military infrastructure and seizing command and control centers.

Experts also expect ground forces to be supported by advanced Apache AH-64 attack helicopters, in addition to A-10 close air support aircraft known for their ability to destroy armor. Despite the clarity of these scenarios, analysts warn that the confrontation will be extremely complex and costly in terms of human lives and material resources.

Among the options also being considered is the seizure of Kharg Island, which is considered the main center for Iranian oil exports in the Gulf. Control of this island would represent a devastating economic blow to the regime in Tehran, as the 82nd Division would secure the island's airport to pave the way for the arrival of heavy ground forces.

However, the biggest challenge facing US forces lies in crossing the Strait of Hormuz and penetrating deep into the territory, where forces would be vulnerable to intense missile attacks. Iranian suicide drones also pose a constant threat to naval vessels and troop concentrations, requiring sophisticated and continuous air defense systems.

The most dangerous and complex scenario involves attempting to seize enriched uranium stockpiles within Iranian nuclear facilities. Such operations require penetrating hundreds of kilometers into Iranian territory to reach sites such as Isfahan or fortified mountain facilities, which carries enormous risks.

Ultimately, the call-up of the 82nd Airborne Division reflects the seriousness of US threats and their transformation into a tangible reality on the ground. Between securing waterways and targeting the nuclear program, the entire region remains on a hot plate, awaiting a political decision that could change the face of the Middle East forever.

The President retains all military options, and the deployment of paratroopers gives Washington flexibility to carry out limited or large-scale ground operations.

Informed sources revealed that Tehran has issued decisive warnings to hotel owners in the region, specifically in the UAE and Bahrain. This move comes amid ongoing military confrontations and Iranian reactions to what it describes as continuous American-Israeli aggression against its sites and interests in the region.

Media reports, citing responsible sources, stated that the missile strikes and complex operations carried out by Iran and its allies have led to a large number of US military bases being put out of service. The sources claimed that the destruction of military infrastructure forced the remaining US forces to seek alternative shelters in civilian hotels.

Based on these developments, Iranian authorities informed hotel management in Manama and Abu Dhabi of the absolute necessity to refrain from hosting or sheltering any US military personnel. The warning emphasized that any facility that violates these instructions will automatically become a legitimate military target for the Iranian armed forces and will not be immune from direct targeting.

In a related context, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard urged civilians in the region to stay away from areas where US forces are stationed to ensure their safety. Statements indicated that the list of potential targets has expanded to include civilian and vital sites used for military or logistical purposes by the United States.

The threats were not limited to hotels but also included a detailed map of the energy infrastructure in the United Arab Emirates. Media outlets close to Iranian decision-making circles published reports showing power generation plants, peaceful nuclear facilities, and solar energy centers as monitored targets.

Military experts warned that any attack targeting the energy lifeline in the UAE would lead to a complete paralysis of the global economic supply chain. Such potential strikes could halt commercial activity in the Gulf region and cause widespread power outages extending beyond the geographical borders of the targeted country.

Official statistics indicate that Iran has targeted seven Arab countries, mostly GCC states, with thousands of missiles and drones. The number of projectiles used since the end of last February reached approximately 4903 missiles and drones, in an unprecedented escalation in the region.

Tehran justifies these intensive attacks as self-defense and a response to attacks on its territory and interests. Despite its assertion that it does not target Arab countries themselves, the reality on the ground indicates significant human and material losses in vital civilian facilities.

The UAE topped the list of countries most exposed to these missile attacks, followed by Kuwait, then the Kingdom of Bahrain and Qatar. Military operations also included targets in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, while Oman recorded the lowest targeting rate since the start of operations.

For his part, Jasem Al-Budaiwi, Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council, stated that the scale of Iranian aggression against GCC countries now poses an existential threat to regional security. Al-Budaiwi clarified that 85 percent of the total missiles launched by Iran during this war were directed towards the Arab Gulf states.

Sources confirmed that Iranian attacks often did not differentiate between military targets and civilian facilities such as airports and ports. These operations caused severe damage to residential buildings and public facilities, prompting a wave of international condemnation and calls for an immediate de-escalation.

Political circles are closely monitoring with great concern the repercussions of including hotels and economic facilities in Iran's target bank, due to its devastating impact on the tourism and investment sectors. Observers fear that this shift could expand the conflict to include direct confrontations within densely populated cities.

Amid this tension, countries in the region are seeking to strengthen their air defense systems to counter increasing missile threats. Intensive diplomatic and military consultations continue between Gulf capitals and their international allies to discuss deterrence methods and protect sensitive infrastructure from any future attacks.

The regional scene remains open to all possibilities, with Tehran insisting on linking regional stability to the complete withdrawal of US forces. Reports confirm that the next phase may witness a qualitative escalation if Iran decides to carry out its threats against the civilian and economic targets it recently identified.

Hotels sheltering US military personnel will be considered legitimate military targets and will be included in the target bank list.

Iranian territories were subjected early this Friday to a series of violent air raids carried out by joint American and Israeli forces, targeting the capital Tehran and a wide range of major cities. Field sources reported that the bombing caused massive destruction to populated residential areas, leading to deaths and missing persons who are still under the rubble in several provinces.

The offensive wave included strategic cities such as Qom, Tabriz, Urmia, and Kashan, in addition to the city of Karaj adjacent to the capital, in an escalation described as the widest since the start of the direct confrontation. Media sources confirmed that the bombing was not limited to military targets but also hit civilian facilities and homes deep within Iranian cities, causing panic among the population.

In Qom province, Tasnim news agency confirmed the death of at least six citizens following a raid targeting the Pardisan residential area, where missiles completely destroyed three homes. The Deputy Governor of Qom, Morteza Heidari, stated that rescue teams are working hard to retrieve victims from under the debris, noting that the number of injuries is likely to rise due to the severity of cases transferred to hospitals.

In the south of the country, the official news agency mourned two siblings who died in a bombing that targeted a residential neighborhood in Shiraz, while others sustained various injuries. The coastal city of Bandar Abbas, overlooking the Gulf, also witnessed the complete destruction of a residential building, reflecting the expansion of the geographical targeting to include vital waterways and border areas.

For his part, the Director of Crisis Management in West Azerbaijan province, Hamid Safari, announced that at least four civilian buildings were directly targeted in the city of Urmia. The Iranian Red Crescent broadcast footage showing civil defense teams racing against time to reach survivors under the rubble of destroyed buildings, confirming severe injuries among unarmed civilians.

Official statistics issued by Iranian officials indicate a very heavy toll, with the number of deaths since the start of the military campaign exceeding 1,348 people, while the number of injured has surpassed 17,000. These figures reflect the magnitude of the firepower used in the attacks, which also targeted the cities of Isfahan, Yazd, and Ahvaz in recent hours.

In contrast, the Israeli army issued an official statement confirming the execution of what it described as 'a wide wave of precise strikes' against targets belonging to the Iranian regime. The statement claimed that the attacks focused on military infrastructure and sites designated for the production of ballistic missiles, in addition to neutralizing air defense systems that posed a threat to the attacking aircraft.

The Israeli army spokesperson clarified that the raids targeted a site described as central and most important for the production of missiles and naval mines in the city of Yazd in central Iran. These statements come at a time when reports of targeting hundreds of vital sites are increasing, amidst conflicting news regarding the true extent of losses in Iranian military capabilities.

On the international level, a state of extreme concern prevailed in the corridors of the United Nations and Western capitals, which warned of catastrophic repercussions of this escalation on regional stability. International reports indicated that the continuation of the confrontation could lead to the closure of international shipping lanes, especially the Strait of Hormuz, which would directly affect global energy supplies and oil prices.

With the continued sound of explosions in several areas, the scene remains open to all possibilities in light of mutual threats of retaliation and counter-retaliation. Political circles are awaiting the nature of the next Iranian move, while ambulance teams in various targeted cities continue to retrieve victims and document the severe damage to civilian infrastructure.

The strikes included residential areas and resulted in deaths and injuries, amidst warnings of the region sliding into an open military escalation.

By: Issam Bakr Secretary of Foreign Relations and Media High Commission for Prisoners' Affairs and Liberated Detainees

The approval of the prisoners' execution law is expected after its ratification by the Knesset's General Assembly ("occupation parliament") in the coming days, following its passage in the preliminary and first readings, and the approval of the so-called National Security Committee. This comes amidst threats and warnings from the so-called Minister of National Security, Ben Gvir, who adopted the law after it was introduced by Knesset member Limor Ben Har-Melech from his own party (Jewish Power). This law officially allows for the execution of prisoners on the grounds of "carrying out acts" that led to the killing of "Jews."

In a simplified and concise manner, this law raises many questions in legal and political circles, with escalating warnings against its imminent implementation in a short period, amid escalating conditions inside prisons and the daily practices and violations committed by the occupying state, which constitute grave transgressions of the most basic provisions of international law and international humanitarian law.

Regarding this law, it does not require "wailing and lamenting," but rather much more than that. Over 28 months of genocide, specifically in the Gaza Strip, the occupying state has carried out extrajudicial executions, including 84 prisoners whose deaths have been confirmed, and the numbers are likely to rise much higher than what has been revealed. Other numbers remain undisclosed in secret prisons or in cases of enforced disappearance, without official disclosure, and require significant efforts to uncover them.

It is noteworthy in this context that the methodology of torture and ill-treatment leading to death has been expanded unprecedentedly in recent months. The death of this number of martyrs in a short period reveals only a small part of what is happening inside prisons, which have effectively turned into fields of daily execution, torture, and continuous abuse, with broad powers granted to prison administrations without any oversight, to practice policies of humiliation and relentless oppression.

Hence, framing execution with an official decision and legislating it raises a fundamental question: Why now? And why at this specific time? If executions were carried out previously, under what legal framework will they be included? And do they represent condemnations of the occupying state?

In this context, the war, i.e., the genocide in the Gaza Strip, and the world's preoccupation with the atrocities committed against unarmed civilians (about 300,000 martyrs and wounded), will be invoked. This provides a golden opportunity not only to escape punishment but also to approve more of these fascist laws.

According to numerous international reports, including the report of the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, international human rights organizations have firmly confirmed the commission of practices amounting to war crimes inside prisons and detention centers, including sexual assaults, beatings, torture, and ill-treatment, in addition to deliberate medical neglect and starvation. Not only that, but the lowest provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and international charters have been violated, in a clear defiance of international will.

Therefore, without the need to approve the execution law, the documentation of the occupation authorities carrying out executions of citizens after their live arrest in many areas, or under the pretext of "unlawful combatant," before television screens in recent months, is a well-known fact that cannot be denied or overlooked.

However, what is new this time is that execution will be presented under a "legitimate" cover, meaning with a parliamentary and legislative system behind it, adopting it, and defending it before international bodies as "the implementation of a law against criminals," in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the entire Palestinian national struggle, even though this struggle is protected by international resolutions, the United Nations, and international legitimacy, within the right of peoples to defend themselves and liberate their occupied territories, in addition to their right to choose and practice various forms of struggle to achieve independence, self-determination, and national sovereignty.

As for this law, without delving into its flaws and provisions, or the official intent it carries to take the lives of prisoners, or even the details of the numbers it includes, or the deceptive time limits for objection, or the method of "fabricating" the presentation of the prisoner before courts and the judiciary involved in covering up many of the occupation's crimes, it came to achieve several goals.

Foremost among these goals are: striking the legitimacy of the national struggle, and creating an additional deterrent factor to limit it, similar to policies of house demolitions, collective punishments, closures, and other repressive tools. It also seeks to break the will of the Palestinian people with brute force, and to prove that the occupation is capable of carrying out executions, massacres, and displacement without regard for international laws or conventions.

Among its goals is also to cover up previous execution crimes, and to provide protection for soldiers and prison administrations, who may be included in international sanctions lists in the future, even if after some time.

It is perhaps only a few days separating us from the entry into force of this law, although it has already been applied to dozens of citizens before its approval, and its official implementation will not take long.

However, in return, it is now necessary to develop an effective, unified, comprehensive, and wide-ranging action plan at various levels, involving political forces, human rights, humanitarian, and civil society organizations, bodies and committees, in addition to embassies, representations, and missions, and to work on including it on the international agenda, as an anti-humanity law, amidst global preoccupation with the raging war in the region and escalating economic crises.

Despite all this, there remains an urgent need that compels everyone not to overlook this issue, which requires initiating a serious and persistent effort, official and popular, local and international, leading to a clear international stance that prevents the implementation of this law and forces the occupying state to stop it.

It is not limited to that, but also requires working to apply international law to hold the occupying power accountable for its crimes that do not lapse with time, and to open the file of executions and field assassinations, the series of killings, and the extermination of families, as happened in Tammoun a few days ago.

It is of utmost importance to launch a wide-ranging campaign at the level of international parliaments, to push them to take effective action to boycott the occupation Knesset under the far-right government, and to work on imposing deterrent international sanctions.

Without serious, balanced, and broad action, this law will remain subject to a fundamentally formal discussion, without significant objection, to be approved and become effective.

We do not want to see the bodies of prisoners hanging on gallows, but we want to see them among us, enjoying life among their families and loved ones, and embracing their children; for this is what the prisoner who spent his life clinging to the dream of independence and liberation awaits.

Amidst accelerating cultural transformations and the global intermingling of fashion styles, the Palestinian thobe stands out as a deeply rooted expression of identity and belonging, carrying a visual memory that documents the human connection to its land and history. This thobe is present as one of the most prominent features of Palestinian cultural distinctiveness, reflecting a rich diversity in its forms, ornaments, and connotations. The importance of preserving it in its authentic form emerges as part of protecting cultural meaning and safeguarding identity in a rapidly changing global context.

The Palestinian thobe is an integrated visual system, with each region having its own distinct language. The dense embroidery of Hebron with its deep colors reflects the steadfastness of the place, while the Bethlehem thobe appears with the precision of its ornaments and its artistic richness, and in the Gaza thobe, the simplicity and fluidity of lines stand out. The map of Palestine is embodied on the fabric through these details that express a deep cultural and geographical diversity, making any ill-considered change a direct affront to the Palestinian visual identity.

The world's openness to new design patterns has led to attempts to reintroduce the Palestinian thobe in contemporary forms. Some of these attempts achieved a conscious balance between authenticity and renewal, by preserving embroidery patterns and their connotations, while introducing thoughtful modifications to cuts or fabrics to suit modern life. These models confirm that modernity can be an extension of heritage when managed with awareness and respect.

In contrast, practices that strip the thobe of its content are increasing through the introduction of random ornaments or changing the locations of embroidery, which deprives it of its connotations, or presenting it as a commercial product separate from its cultural context. These practices affect the essence of the thobe and weaken its presence as a symbol of identity. Any tampering with the structure of the Palestinian thobe is not development, but a direct distortion of a visual memory that has endured through time.

Preserving the Palestinian thobe requires conscious management of development processes. Introducing new materials or additional colors remains possible within limits that preserve the original spirit of the embroidery, its location, and its connotations. Every stitch carries meaning, and every pattern belongs to a context, and any change outside this framework causes the thobe to lose the language it speaks.

Leading Palestinian experiences have emerged that presented the thobe in modern forms without compromising its essential elements. Palestinian designers have been able to bring this attire to international platforms, while preserving its authenticity as a cultural product that carries a message. These experiences confirm that the strength of the thobe lies in its commitment to its roots, and that its global presence increases the more it is true to its identity.

The Palestinian's connection to their thobe goes beyond the aesthetic dimension to a deep emotional relationship. On national and social occasions, the thobe transforms into a silent declaration of identity and an affirmation of presence and continuity. When a Palestinian woman wears her thobe, she carries a history of steadfastness, and expresses a deeply rooted belonging connected to the land and memory.

Amidst attempts to erase identity, preserving the thobe takes on a cultural dimension that reflects adherence to distinctiveness and enhances cultural presence. Supporting this heritage through documentation, education, and empowering craftswomen forms a basis for its continuity as a living part of culture, not just an element preserved in memory.

On an international level, the Palestinian thobe is one of the most prominent symbols of cultural identity, which necessitates its presentation in its accurate and authentic form. Any distortion in its features reflects on the image of identity itself, and weakens its presence as a coherent cultural symbol. Commitment to its authenticity represents a cultural responsibility that goes beyond taste to a stance.

In conclusion, the Palestinian thobe is a living identity that renews itself without losing its essence. The challenge lies in achieving a conscious balance between development and preserving authenticity, in a way that maintains the symbolism of this attire as one of the most important expressions of Palestinian identity. In the age of globalization, a clear identity remains a source of strength, and the Palestinian thobe remains a witness to a people who preserve their history in its details, and wear it with confidence and awareness.

Mustafa Ibrahim: Future scenarios are unclear amidst Israeli reports of a US proposal to disarm "Hamas," which has not yet been agreed upon.

Dr. Rifaat Sayed Ahmed: Attention is currently focused on the war on Iran, but any future agreements, if they do not do justice to the Palestinian people, will be nothing more than temporary solutions.

Dr. Riyad Ali Al-Aila: The Gaza Strip is "less of a media priority" due to intertwined crises, but what is happening there is inseparable from regional tensions, including those related to Iran.

Emad Abu Awwad: The absence of the Palestinian issue from the general scene, and no indications of real solutions for the current situation within the Strip in the near future.

Dr. Mukhaimer Abu Saada: What is happening in Gaza is a slow death for more than two million people facing siege, disease, and loss of hope amidst declining international and regional attention.

Exclusive to Al-Quds-

Israel is exploiting the international preoccupation with the ongoing war on Iran, continuing its violations of the ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip, while failing to commit to opening the Rafah crossing as expected from the first phase. It imposed strict restrictions and closed the crossing, which only opened for a limited period not exceeding two or three weeks, before being re-closed with the advent of Eid al-Fitr.

Writers and observers warn in interviews with "Y" that what is happening in the Gaza Strip is a slow death for more than two million people facing siege, disease, and loss of hope, amidst declining regional and international attention due to the ongoing war on Iran. They emphasize the need for international and American intervention to pressure Israel to enable the National Committee for Gaza Administration to carry out its duties and responsibilities towards the Gaza Strip, as well as to increase the number of travelers through the Rafah crossing, increase the number of trucks through the Kerem Shalom crossing, and also to begin the reconstruction process of the Strip.

They pointed out that without a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue, guaranteeing the establishment of a real and viable Palestinian state, the region's crises will remain unresolved, and any agreements that do not place the Palestinian issue at their core will be temporary and unable to end the conflict.

Complete absence of the picture from the Strip

Writer and political analyst Mustafa Ibrahim confirms that what is happening in the Gaza Strip, in light of the American-Israeli war on Iran, has led to the complete absence of the picture from the Strip, as the world has been preoccupied with the developments in this war.

Ibrahim points out that the United States of America has been preoccupied with the arrangements of what is known as the Peace Council and its various bodies, including the administrative committee for managing the Gaza Strip, all of whose members are still in the Arab Republic of Egypt awaiting permission to enter. In contrast, Israel did not commit to opening the Rafah crossing as expected from the first phase, as it imposed strict restrictions and closed the crossing, and it only opened for a limited period not exceeding two or three weeks, before being re-closed with the advent of Eid al-Fitr.

The number of travelers through the crossing was very limited

Ibrahim explains that the number of travelers through the crossing was very limited, not exceeding about one hundred people daily, most of whom were sick and wounded who are in dire need of treatment abroad, especially cancer patients and those with chronic diseases, accompanied by escorts.

He adds: Between six and ten patients lose their lives daily in Gaza while waiting to travel for treatment, and the actual number may be higher, given that some deaths are not accurately recorded or are classified as natural deaths.

Ibrahim also points out that not all of these deaths reach hospitals, as some cases occur in homes without sufficient documentation, while official figures only show a part of the catastrophe's scale, especially among patients on waiting lists for treatment outside the Strip.

He confirms that the war on Iran and the accompanying international media momentum contributed to obscuring what is happening in Gaza, at a time when Israeli violations have not stopped daily.

Ibrahim stresses that what is happening cannot be considered mere breaches, but rather a continuation of the policy of assassinations and bombing of homes, pointing to the death of nine martyrs during the Eid period as a result of various targeting that affected civilians and police officers.

Israel did not commit to a ceasefire

Ibrahim believes that these developments come in the context of an extended war, despite the announcement of a ceasefire on October 10th last year. However, Israel did not adhere to the stages of the agreement, as the first stage continued for more than one hundred days under the pretext of searching for the body of an Israeli soldier, before announcing the transition to the second stage related to disarmament, contrary to what was stipulated in the international understandings that link this stage to Israeli withdrawal and reconstruction.

Ibrahim adds: The Israeli Prime Minister is placing obstacles to the implementation of these understandings, with American support, which allows for the continuation of military operations and daily violations.

The volume of aid entering is much less than required

In the humanitarian context, Ibrahim points out that the volume of aid entering the Strip is much less than required, as about 600 trucks are supposed to enter daily, while the actual number does not exceed between 150 and 200 trucks, most of which are food aid.

Ibrahim also points to a severe shortage of medicines, especially for chronic diseases such as high blood pressure and diabetes, in addition to their high prices if available. He indicates the absence of fuel entry except in limited quantities allocated to international organizations and essential services, such as operating water and sanitation stations, amidst a severe shortage of drinking water, especially in Gaza City, due to damage to infrastructure.

Regarding cooking gas, Ibrahim explains that the quantities entering do not exceed four to five trucks daily since Ramadan, which led to a reduction in the citizen's share from 12 kilograms to only 8 kilograms per cylinder, which exacerbated the suffering of the residents.

Ibrahim warns that the absence of real international pressure to alleviate the crisis will lead to a worsening of the situation, pointing out that the last ten days of Ramadan witnessed a severe shortage of goods and vegetables due to Israeli restrictions.

Future scenarios are still unclear

On the political front, writer Ibrahim confirms that future scenarios are still unclear, amidst Israeli media reports of an American proposal to disarm the Hamas movement within six months, which the movement has not yet agreed to, meaning the continuation of the siege and restrictions, and the continued division of the Strip, where Israeli forces control between 53% to 60% of its area.

Regarding the administration of the Strip, he explains that the administrative committee has not yet started its work, despite talk of Hamas's readiness to hand over power under conditions related to the fate of about 40 to 50 thousand employees working in the Strip.

Ibrahim also touches upon security arrangements, pointing to talk of forming a multinational force under the name of "Stability Authority," to replace Israeli forces if they withdraw, but the tasks of this force are still unclear, both in terms of its deployment and its role in disarmament.

Ibrahim adds: There is talk of forming a Palestinian police force of about 3000 elements, without clarity on the mechanism of its formation or training, which reflects the complexity of the scene.

Ibrahim concludes his talk to "Y" by saying: The continued absence of international pressure, especially on the United States and Israel, will lead to a more dangerous worsening of the humanitarian and political situation in the Gaza Strip than it is currently.

Shift in the compass of attention

Egyptian strategic expert Dr. Rifaat Sayed Ahmed says: All attention is currently directed towards the bullets and bombs targeting Tehran, which is one of Israel's goals of occupying the region with its internal crises; so that each party is preoccupied with its own issues, whether in Lebanon or Iran, which leads to the gradual isolation of the Palestinian people and the targeting of their infrastructure.

Sayed Ahmed adds: This shift in the compass of attention primarily serves an Israeli goal, not an Arab or Islamic one.

Regarding the conditions presented by Iran for negotiations, Sayed Ahmed points out that they are based on the principle of a comprehensive deal that includes all fronts in one package, including Iran's allies in the region, which was supposed to be discussed in negotiations expected to be held in Pakistan.

Israel is working to deal with each front separately

In contrast, Sayed Ahmed believes that Israel is working to deal with each front separately, as has been the case since 2023, which necessitates not forgetting the Gaza Strip amidst this conflict imposed by Israel and the United States, especially with public opinion preoccupied with Iranian missiles and Israeli and American responses.

The Egyptian expert confirms that putting Gaza back at the heart of attention is essential, considering that the injustice of the people of the Strip and the Palestinian people in general is the core of the issue.

He believes that without a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue, guaranteeing the establishment of a real and viable Palestinian state, the region's crises will remain unresolved, and any agreements that do not place the Palestinian issue at their core will be temporary and unable to end the conflict.

Sayed Ahmed expresses his concern that any future agreements, whether from allies or adversaries, if they do not do justice to the Palestinian people, will be nothing more than temporary solutions, because the roots of the crisis have existed since 1948.

Israel may turn back to the Gaza Strip

In a related context, expert Sayed Ahmed warns that Israel, after finishing with the Iran and Hezbollah files, may turn back to the Gaza Strip, which could lead to a dangerous escalation reaching the point of committing new massacres. He also points to fears of displacement scenarios towards Sinai, stressing that these hypotheses require attention and caution.

Sayed Ahmed concludes by saying: The core of the crisis in the region is linked to the Palestinian issue, and any solution that does not address this issue radically will remain a temporary solution, and will not achieve lasting stability.

What is happening in Gaza is inseparable from regional tensions

Dr. Riyad Ali Al-Aila, Professor of Political Science at Al-Azhar University, says: What is happening in Gaza is inseparable from regional tensions, including those related to Iran, for several reasons.

He confirms that Gaza has not disappeared from global media, but its coverage has declined, due to escalating tensions with Iran, and even with the US and Israel launching a war on it 24 days ago. At the same time, the media usually tends to shift focus to the latest, which leads to:

First: Reduced spotlight on daily humanitarian crises in the Gaza Strip.

Second: Decline in related international pressure, with a growing feeling among people that the suffering may have "become forgotten." But on the ground, the crisis continues and even worsens, especially regarding patients.

Third: Restrictions on travel and external treatment, in addition to a shortage of medicines and equipment.

Fourth: Slow and complex medical coordination, leading to avoidable deaths.

Fifth: Why do patients die? The reasons are often a combination of: closure or restriction of crossings, lengthy procedures for issuing permits, in addition to the weak health system in the Gaza Strip under pressure, and delayed medical transfers.

Al-Aila points out that "all of the above leads us to say that it is not a medical problem, but primarily a political and logistical one."

Possible scenarios

In light of this, Al-Aila presents a number of possible scenarios to end or alleviate the suffering, but they are not quick solutions due to the war on Iran, and the freezing of the peace plan proposed by US President Trump until the end of the war. The possible paths are:

Scenario One: Partial de-escalation, through temporary agreements to halt escalation, with limited opening of crossings for humanitarian cases, and increased entry of aid.

This scenario is the most realistic in the short term, but it does not solve the problem from its roots, which are essentially political.

Al-Aila adds that Scenario Two: International humanitarian pressure, which relies on stronger intervention from international organizations, leading to the establishment of "safe medical corridors," and accelerating the transfer of patients for treatment abroad.

This scenario could quickly reduce deaths, especially in critical cases.

Al-Aila confirms that Scenario Three: Linking the humanitarian file to political deals, by including the patient and aid file within broader negotiations, and using it as a bargaining chip between parties.

This scenario can achieve results, but it remains fragile and depends on political balances.

Scenario Four: A comprehensive political solution (which is the furthest but most impactful), leading to a broader settlement of the conflict, resulting in a radical lifting of restrictions, with the reconstruction of the health system and infrastructure.

I believe this scenario represents the real solution, but it is the least likely in the short term.

Al-Aila concluded by saying: The Gaza Strip has not and will not disappear, but it has become "less of a media priority" due to intertwined crises, and specifically the war launched by the United States and Israel on Iran, which is still ongoing. The suffering of patients has increased, which is a direct result of this complex political reality. However, the closest practical hope currently is to improve humanitarian access, especially medical, through international pressure and partial agreements, even if the crisis is not fully resolved.

Absence of the Palestinian issue from the general scene

Emad Abu Awwad, an analyst specializing in Israeli affairs, believes that the Palestinian issue, and not just Gaza, has been absent from the general scene.

He says if we focus specifically on the Gaza Strip, it is suffering from increasing problems related to travel and the entry of goods, in addition to its absence from public discussion, and the continuation of a stalemate in the situation.

Abu Awwad adds: The series of assassinations witnessed last month, along with the major regional event of the war with Iran, contributed to covering up the Palestinian issue, especially what is happening in the Gaza Strip, as well as the attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank by settlers.

Analyst Abu Awwad believes that even if the war with Iran stops in the coming period, Israel may escalate the confrontation with Lebanon, given its discomfort with stopping the war under current circumstances. Therefore, it may seek to cover that up by opening another front.

Abu Awwad warns that this trend means the Gaza Strip will remain in a state of stagnation and stalemate, with a gradual decline in various aspects of life.

He explains that we may witness a complete ban on travel from the Strip abroad, and a decline in the entry of goods, in addition to a decrease in their quality, which will exacerbate the suffering of the residents amidst the ongoing regional war.

Abu Awwad also points out that the Gaza Strip is even absent from media coverage in major media outlets.

Abu Awwad confirms that he does not currently see any immediate scenarios that would alleviate the suffering of the residents, as long as the regional war continues.

Abu Awwad adds that there is one scenario that might open the door to solutions, which is Israel entering a state of attrition on the Iranian and Lebanese fronts, leading to its retreat, and then opportunities may arise to address a number of issues, including the situation in the Gaza Strip.

However, Abu Awwad confirms that in the short term there are no indications of real solutions for the current situation within the Strip.

Worsening suffering in the Strip

Dr. Mukhaimer Abu Saada, Professor of Political Science at Al-Azhar University in Gaza, says: Since the American-Israeli attack on Iran on February 28th last year, international and regional attention to the Gaza file and the daily humanitarian suffering in the Strip, which worsened after October 7, 2023, has declined.

He adds: Israel closed the Rafah crossing, which was agreed to be opened after the formation of the Peace Council and the establishment of the National Committee for Gaza Administration in January of this year.

Abu Saada believes that the closure of the crossing caused the death of some patients who are in dire need of medical service outside the Gaza Strip, such as cancer patients, as well as war wounded, whose numbers were estimated by the World Health Organization at about 18,500 patients and injured.

Abu Saada also points to a decrease in the number of trucks entering from the Kerem Shalom crossing to supply the Strip with food, medicine, fuel, and cooking gas. He notes that all of this has led to a worsening of the daily humanitarian suffering of Palestinians.

Abu Saada confirms that despite the recent reopening of the Rafah crossing, the numbers are still very small compared to the number of people who need treatment or to return to the Strip.

Abu Saada expresses regret that Gaza is no longer making international and regional headlines due to the war on Iran and the ongoing confrontations in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah.

He says: What is required is international and American intervention to pressure Israel to enable the National Committee for Gaza Administration to carry out its duties and responsibilities towards the Gaza Strip, as well as to increase the number of travelers through the Rafah crossing, and to increase the number of trucks through the Kerem Shalom crossing, and also to begin the process of rebuilding and reconstructing the Strip.

Abu Saada believes that what is happening in Gaza is a slow death for more than two million people facing siege, disease, and hopelessness.

The series Bleeding Earth, directed by Bashar Al-Najjar, is one of those rare dramatic works that did not merely narrate the Palestinian cause but sought to embody it from within, through a lived rather than imagined experience. When compared with prominent Arab works such as The Palestinian Exodus by director Hatem Ali, "Bleeding Earth" appears to move in a more intimate and realistic direction, almost touching the boundaries of a living testimony, and even surpassing them to raise profound questions about the meaning of representation itself.

The series presents an accumulated narrative of the suffering of the Palestinian people under occupation, not only from the perspective of major events but from the details of daily life: anxiety, loss, waiting, and clinging to the land. However, the characters here do not appear as traditional dramatic archetypes, but as living extensions of a collective memory, carrying within them the intersection of the private and the public, the individual and the national.

What distinguishes the work is its reliance on Palestinian actors who have lived the same experience, which gave the performance exceptional authenticity. The viewer does not see "acting" as much as they witness a re-enactment of reality, where autobiography intertwines with dramatic construction, transforming the work into a living mirror of Palestinian suffering.

This authenticity extends to the level of acting performance, clearly manifested in the character of "Umm Bilal" played by Munira Zuraiqi. Zuraiqi was able to convey to the viewer a wide spectrum of human emotions—from anger to sadness to moments of joy mixed with pain—with a high emotional intensity that is difficult to achieve through traditional acting. The reason for this is not only due to her performing skill but because the role is an extension of a lived experience burdened with loss; she lost her brother Munir in Lebanon in 1982, her uncle was martyred in Syrian regime prisons, and she also lost her husband Bassam Shahrouri in the Hammam al-Shatt massacre in Tunisia in 1985.

In this context, the performance does not seem to be mere acting, but a summoning of a personal memory laden with losses, where the self merged with the character until the distance between the "actor" and the "role" disappeared. Here, we do not watch the acting of grief, but its actual presence, as if drama has lost its mediation and transformed into a direct human outpouring.

This identification is not limited to Zuraiqi alone but extends to most of the cast, who were not so much performing roles as they were reliving their personal and collective memories in front of the camera. From this, the series becomes closer to an act of collective outpouring, where drama transforms into a space for summoning real pain, not re-enacting it, which gives the work an exceptional impact that directly reaches the viewer's conscience.

The role of the director himself, Bashar Al-Najjar, cannot be overlooked. He not only directed but also participated as an actor, embodying the character of "Dr. Abdullah" with remarkable skill, reflecting a deep understanding of the character and its human dimensions. He is known for his belief in cultural action and his insistence on completing works despite scarce resources, to the extent that, in one experience, he sold his private car to be able to complete the production of one of his series. This dedication is not read as a fleeting incident but as part of the spirit of the work itself, where the insistence on production becomes a form of cultural resistance.

On a deeper level, Bleeding Earth does not present itself as a traditional dramatic work but raises a philosophical problem related to the limits of representation: when does art stop being an imitation and begin to transform into a parallel reality? The characters here are not built according to a purely dramatic logic but emerge from a living memory, making them closer to "embodied testimonies" than to written roles.

Within this context, Munira Zuraiqi's experience in the role of "Umm Bilal" becomes an example of the fading distance between the self and the role, where emotions are no longer a performable technique but an expression of a personal memory that explodes in front of the camera. Here, the recipient does not watch the acting of pain but confronts its presence, in an experience that almost touches what can be called "existential authenticity" in performance.

This transformation also extends to Bashar Al-Najjar's vision, who does not treat directing as merely an artistic craft but as an act of cultural resistance. His insistence on producing the work despite scarce resources reflects a conception of art as an existential necessity, not an aesthetic luxury. In this sense, the work itself becomes an extension of the idea of steadfastness, not only in its subject matter but also in its production conditions.

From this, the series can be read as part of the "archive of Palestinian pain," where the story is not told merely for impact but for preservation—preserving memory from erosion and transforming it into a lasting image. And it is precisely here that the fundamental difference between it and The Palestinian Exodus lies; the latter presented an epic historical narrative, while "Bleeding Earth" presents an immediate, raw experience, pulsating with a reality that has not yet turned into the past.

Bleeding Earth is not just a dramatic work, but an artistic document and a human testimony that transcends the boundaries of traditional art. Its strength lies not only in its subject matter but in its authenticity, and in giving a voice to those who lived the experience, not to those who imagined it. It is a work to be watched with the heart, read with the mind, and preserved in memory—as an example of how art, when it stems from real pain, can transform into an act of survival, and a form of resistance that cannot be erased.

The Arab and Lebanese art scene lost the esteemed artist Ahmed Kaabour, who passed away after a bitter struggle with illness, leaving behind a rare musical legacy in which he always sided with human and national causes. Kaabour was known for his warm voice that expressed the pains and hopes of peoples, and he remained committed to his artistic message even in his darkest health conditions, emphasizing the role of art in the battles for liberation and social justice.

The deceased is considered one of the most prominent figures associated with the Palestinian cause, as his famous song 'Anadeekum' became a national anthem recited in every Palestinian and Arab home since the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. This song was not just a fleeting work, but a cry of steadfastness inspired by the words of the poet Tawfiq Ziad, to remain etched in the conscience of successive generations who chanted it in squares and public spaces.

Ahmed Kaabour was born in the heart of the capital Beirut in 1955, and grew up in a cultural environment that enabled him to hone his talent at the Institute of Fine Arts at the Lebanese University. The features of his artistic personality began to crystallize in the seventies, a period that witnessed major political transformations in the region, which led him to engage in committed artistic work that integrates music with political and social concerns.

His first spark of fame came through the 'Popular Chorus' band, where he toured with his colleagues fighting camps, refugee camps, and hospitals to sing for the wounded and afflicted. This field experience made his voice close to the pulse of the street, and contributed to the spread of his works, which were not seeking the spotlight as much as they were seeking the truth and standing by the oppressed.

In addition to his clear Palestinian affiliation in works such as 'Ya Nabdh Al-Daffa' (Oh Pulse of the West Bank) and 'Samouni Lajee' (They Called Me a Refugee), Kaabour was a loyal son of Beirut, carrying the legacy of the popular artist Omar Al-Zaani. He succeeded in updating this legacy through social and Ramadan songs that became part of the Lebanese popular heritage, including the song 'Allou Al-Bayariq' (Raise the Banners) which is still broadcast on occasions and holidays.

Kaabour's creative journey diversified to include theater and cinema, where he collaborated with the great artist Ziad Rahbani in several works that left a clear mark on contemporary Lebanese art. He also made a remarkable appearance in cinema through his participation in a film about the life of the late Palestinian cartoonist Naji Al-Ali, which reflected the depth of his connection with Palestinian struggle symbols.

In his final years, despite the burden of illness that weighed on his body, Kaabour did not stop singing for the people he had always addressed in his song 'Nahna Al-Nas' (We Are the People). He saw standing on stage and facing the audience as an antidote to his pains, insisting that his voice remain a bridge connecting community issues with purposeful art that seeks to change reality for the better.

The deceased's style was characterized by an elusive simplicity and the ability to reach the hearts of different social classes without complexity, as he worked to develop political songs to become more humane and closer to simple daily life. He also made great efforts to integrate music into educational and cultural curricula, believing that art is the most powerful tool for building the awareness of new generations.

Ahmed Kaabour passed away, leaving a great void in the committed art scene, but the echo of his voice will continue to resonate in the alleys of Beirut, the streets of Jerusalem, and the camps of the diaspora. His passing represents the end of a chapter of resistance art, but the impact he left on the collective Arab memory will remain alive, reminding everyone that true art always sides with humanity and its just cause.

I call upon you.. and I shake your hands.. and I kiss the ground beneath your shoes.. and I say I sacrifice myself for you.

Amidst the raging wars in the Middle East, another equally dangerous war emerges: the sectarian-doctrinal war that drains minds and entrenches deep divisions among the people of the same nation. This confrontation, fueled by regional sectarian behavior, now threatens the future of the region and imposes a reality that requires re-reading outside the traditional frameworks of conflict.

The true compass that should guide peoples is the compass of freedom, as it is the only guarantee for building strong international and popular relations. From this perspective, it appears that there is an objective commonality among disparate regional powers in sabotaging the dream of the 'Arab Spring of Freedoms,' which is a historical crime against peoples yearning for change.

Iran has worked to transform the Arab sphere in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen into a defensive wall for its national center, using clear sectarian and ethnic agendas. This approach has led to a direct clash with the aspirations of the peoples, especially when the weapon of resistance shifted from its original direction to become a tool in internal sectarian wars.

The Sunni public, which had viewed the resistance experience with great appreciation, was shocked by Iran's bias against popular revolutions, particularly in the Syrian case. This emotional and political estrangement revealed the prioritization of doctrinal interests over the principles of liberation advocated by the Iranian Revolution in its early stages, which scattered popular sympathy for it.

The responsibility for aborting the Arab Spring cannot be confined to one party, as official Arab regimes led operations to finance military coups to ensure the return of repression. This intersection between 'Sunni' regimes and 'Shiite' Iran proved that the common hostility to the freedom of peoples is stronger than the declared doctrinal differences between these parties.

An undeclared consensus occurred between seemingly contradictory forces to thwart the democratic experiment in Egypt and other Arab Spring countries. This betrayal did not stop at the limits of internal politics but extended to affect the fronts of resistance, where true support for Gaza was absent at critical moments as a result of these narrow calculations.

Iran, as a state and a regime, deviated from the path of its first revolution to become an expansionist power that places its national interest above any unifying Islamic consideration. This political behavior has not changed even in the most difficult circumstances, as it continued to tamper with the Syrian social fabric and ally with the remnants of oppressive regimes without review or apology.

An objective assessment indicates that the Iranian regime did not differ much from Arab authoritarian regimes in its hostility to the aspirations of peoples for dignity. For this reason, we find that understandings between these regimes and Iran were sometimes easier than their understandings with the popular and democratic forces that emerged from the revolutions.

There is a state of fragmentation in the Arab street between the necessity of standing against external aggression and the bitterness of regional policies that suppressed freedoms. This fragmentation results from the absence of a freedom agenda among the warring parties, which treat the masses as subordinate tools, not as partners in destiny.

We reject political sectarianism that hides behind fatwas to justify betrayal or facilitate aggression against any regional party. At the same time, we affirm that self-defense is a legitimate right for any state, but this right does not grant immunity against criticism of its oppressive practices towards neighboring peoples.

The fundamental issue that separates us from any regime, whether Arab or regional, is the issue of freedom and the extent of its respect for the will of the people. Whoever is with human freedom is a natural ally, and whoever works to sabotage it cannot be relied upon for support, no matter how dazzling their slogans.

Authoritarian regimes have drained the energies of peoples for decades under the pretext of liberating Palestine, and in the end, we lost freedom and did not liberate the land. This historical lesson must be present today; human dignity cannot be bartered for any political or military promises that do not prioritize human beings.

The current war acts as a 'sieve' that exposes the falsity of claims and shatters the illusions promoted by authoritarian regimes for many years. Peoples today are more aware of the necessity of liberation from blind dependence and the search for an independent path that preserves their rights away from emotional blackmail.

In conclusion, freedom remains the criterion and the goal, and we will not sign 'blank checks' for any party that practices oppression under any name. The future will only be built by the hands of liberated peoples who reject internal tyranny and external aggression alike, believing that their dignity is the key to true victory.

Freedom is the starting point, the pillar of construction, and the guarantee of historical victory, and from it, we proceed and to it, we refer in evaluating conflicts.