The book 'The Demographic Conflict in Palestine from the Nakba to the War of Annihilation' by researchers Jamal Al-Baba and Hani Talib reviews the forced transformations witnessed in the Palestinian territories, especially after the events of October 7, 2023. The authors believe that demography has become a central arena of conflict used by Israel as a tool to re-engineer human and geographical reality to serve long-term strategic goals.\n\nThe study confirms that the recent war resulted in unprecedented waves of displacement and widespread destruction of infrastructure, leading to a sharp decline in natural growth indicators and a radical change in the geographical distribution of the population. Despite these pressures, Palestinian society maintained dynamics of social resilience that contributed to solidifying its historical presence, leaving the demographic balance as a crucial element in the equation of future political solutions.\n\nReturning to historical roots, sources indicate that the 1948 war led to the displacement of 780,000 Palestinians, while Israel controlled 78% of historical Palestine. 150,000 Palestinians remained within the territories occupied in '48, who later formed a demographic dilemma for the occupation, which tried to politically and socially marginalize them despite granting them nominal citizenship.\n\nAccording to statistics in the book, the number of Palestinians in the occupied interior was estimated at approximately 1.809 million people by the end of 2024, representing 18% of the total population. Jerusalem leads the population centers in terms of the number of Muslims, with 386,000 inhabitants, constituting about 37% of the total population of the holy city, despite continuous restrictive policies.\n\nRegarding the Gaza Strip, the study clarifies that the Strip, with an area not exceeding 365 km2, received 190,000 refugees after the Nakba, creating immense pressure on limited resources. Over the past decades, the Strip has witnessed migration rates in search of work, but the human mass has remained a constant demographic challenge to Israeli plans aimed at liquidating the issue.\n\nThe book paints a grim demographic map for the period after October 2023, where more than 85% of Gaza's population was forcibly displaced multiple times due to military operations. The occupation authorities currently control about 58% of the Strip's area, while two million Palestinians are crammed into the remaining area, not exceeding 42%, amidst humanitarian conditions described by sources as extremely difficult.\n\nThe study revealed Israeli intelligence documents indicating that the "optimal solution" from the occupation's perspective is to evacuate Gaza residents to Sinai, which faced firm Arab and international rejection. Due to this failure in comprehensive forced displacement, Israeli policy shifted towards promoting what is called "voluntary migration" by creating an uninhabitable environment within the Strip.\n\nPopulation growth in Gaza was severely affected, recording a 6% decrease in 2024 and about 10% in 2025 due to the rising number of martyrs and missing persons and a decline in births. The Israeli army deliberately targeted young people and children, causing a clear distortion in the population pyramid and a change in the age and gender composition of Gazan society.\n\nDespite this systematic targeting, Palestinian youth in the (18-29 years) age group still constitute about 21% of the total population by mid-2025. The study considers this group to be the main pillar for any future development or national response to crises, and the real guarantee for the continuation of Palestinian existence in the face of replacement attempts.\n\nThe book compares the drivers of population growth for both sides, where Jewish population growth receives full logistical and legal support from the state to facilitate spatial expansion. In contrast, Palestinian population policies are subject to occupation restrictions on geography, forcing Palestinians to combine limited development with defensive resilience against settlement expansion.\n\nIsrael pursues a settlement policy aimed at preventing geographical connectivity between Palestinian communities, while promoting unhindered connectivity between settlements. These policies force Palestinians to build vertically due to the prevention of horizontal expansion, especially in Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley, areas subject to security and military planning aimed at absolute control over resources.\n\nThe number of settlers in the West Bank doubled alarmingly between 2005 and 2023, jumping from 256,000 to about 501,000 settlers. With the addition of Jerusalem settlers, the total reaches 746,000, under Israeli legislation approved in 2025 to establish 22 new settlements to legitimize settlement outposts and impose permanent sovereignty.\n\nThe study concludes by emphasizing the necessity of developing a conscious Palestinian strategy to confront the demographic repercussions of the war, by strengthening the population's ability to remain and expanding humanitarian aid. The authors propose protecting the most vulnerable groups and investing in the young age structure as a tool to confront the plans of emptying and demographic weakening pursued by the colonizer.\n\nThe concluding recommendations include encouraging investment in Area C and developing housing projects in areas with limited sovereignty, in addition to strengthening social networking with Palestinians in the diaspora and within. The book affirms that current demographic transformations are not natural, but rather the result of replacement policies that require a comprehensive national response to ensure the stability of threatened communities.\n\nThe conflict is no longer limited to political or military competition over land and resources; rather, at its core, it has become a conflict over the human being itself; their existence, number, and ability to survive.

Elements of the British police raided the home of Palestinian doctor Rahma Al-Adwan in the capital, London, where video clips documented the moment her hands were tied and she was taken away by a group of security personnel. Al-Adwan appeared in the video asking the security force if this measure was related to her declared positions and her digital activity supporting the Palestinian cause, which sparked widespread interaction across social media platforms.

The British Metropolitan Police clarified in an official statement that the arrest of the 31-year-old doctor came as a result of her violating the bail conditions imposed on her following previous arrests. Al-Adwan faces charges described by the authorities as serious, including allegations of supporting an organization classified as 'terrorist' under British law, in addition to charges related to violating counter-terrorism legislation in force in the United Kingdom.

The case brought against the Palestinian doctor is based on a series of posts and comments shared online during the second half of 2025, specifically between July and December. The authorities claim that these published materials include incitement to hatred or the distribution of content supporting the Hamas movement, which London lists among its prohibited organizations.

Following the arrest, Al-Adwan was transferred to a detention center in central London to complete the necessary investigations and legal procedures. The doctor is scheduled to appear before Westminster Magistrates' Court today, Friday, to consider the charges against her, amid anticipation from human rights and legal organizations monitoring freedom of expression cases in Britain.

Rahma Al-Adwan is considered an active figure in defending Palestinian rights, having been arrested four previous times due to her political stances. She also faced professional pressure that led to her suspension from practicing medicine by the British General Medical Council at the end of 2025, due to her sharp criticism of Western governments' complicity with Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip.

This incident has sparked a wave of concern in media and political circles, with observers warning of increasing restrictions on voices opposing British foreign policies towards the Palestinian issue. Human rights defenders believe that the use of counter-terrorism laws to prosecute activists for their posts represents a direct threat to the essence of freedom of expression and the right to peaceful protest.

Is the reason for my detention related to my social media posts?

By: Said Arikat

March 27, 2026

News Analysis

Washington, D.C- As bombs fall on Lebanese villages and bridges across the Litani River collapse, one fact becomes impossible to ignore: Israel’s military operations are not merely defensive measures. They reflect a calculated, expansionist strategy rooted in decades-old ambitions for a “Greater Israel” that stretches beyond its recognized borders into southern Lebanon and even parts of Syria. When civilians are uprooted en masse and infrastructure is deliberately destroyed, the goal is not only to neutralize armed groups—but to reshape the map itself. Forced displacement, village destruction, and rhetoric of occupation reveal a long-standing strategy to extend Israeli control well beyond its internationally recognized territory.

History offers sobering context. Documents submitted by the World Zionist Organization to the Paris Peace Conference after World War I reveal proposed Jewish state boundaries stretching northward to the Litani River. While never ratified, these early maps illuminate a persistent territorial imagination in which military conquest, demographic engineering, and ideological vision were deeply intertwined. Today’s military operations, coupled with explicit political statements, suggest that these ambitions remain influential, guiding contemporary strategies and shaping regional perceptions of Israel’s goals.

The scale and targets of current military operations are profoundly significant. The systematic destruction of villages and infrastructure—roads, bridges, and essential utilities—is not merely tactical. It isolates communities, cripples local economies, and makes civilian return increasingly difficult. By uprooting populations, Israel is employing a method historically associated with demographic transformation: removing inhabitants to facilitate long-term territorial control. When displacement becomes normalized as a tool of war, the line between defense and expansion blurs, raising profound moral and political questions.

Strategically, southern Lebanon and the Litani River hold multiple forms of value. The Litani is more than a geographic marker; it represents water resources, natural defensive boundaries, and a corridor of strategic depth. Its recurring presence in both historical proposals and contemporary military planning is no accident. Similarly, the occasional discussion of extending operations into parts of Syria underscores the wider regional ambitions embedded within Israel’s security doctrine. These are not merely reactions to immediate threats—they are components of a vision of regional dominance that traces back to the earliest Zionist territorial aspirations.

This expansionist logic is reinforced by rhetoric that frames displacement as a security necessity. Such framing obscures the broader intent: to assert control over territories beyond Israel’s recognized borders. The historical resonance is striking. Early Zionist planners envisioned demographic and territorial consolidation as essential to state survival. Today, large-scale forced exiles, infrastructure destruction, and sustained military occupation suggest continuity with that logic. Military action is not only about neutralizing armed groups but about shaping a territorial reality conducive to ideological ambitions.

International law is explicit in condemning collective punishment, forced displacement, and attempts to annex territory by force. Yet beyond legal frameworks, the strategic consequences are equally stark. Displacement fosters enduring hostility, deepens sectarian fault lines, and creates conditions ripe for future conflict. Expansionist war does not secure peace; it ensures resistance. Every demolished village, every uprooted community, compounds historical grievances, making reconciliation far more difficult.

The implications extend beyond immediate borders. Actions along the Litani and in southern Lebanon send signals to the wider Middle East, reinforcing perceptions that Israel’s military campaigns are guided by long-term expansionist objectives. Even without formal annexation declarations, the cumulative effect on the ground is clear: certain territories are being incorporated into the vision of a Greater Israel. This perception, whether accurate or exaggerated, shapes the political calculations of Lebanon, Syria, and regional actors, complicating diplomacy and reinforcing cycles of militarization.

The contemporary iteration of this strategy also underscores a disturbing normalization of demographic engineering as an instrument of policy. When civilian populations are treated as obstacles to territorial control rather than stakeholders in political solutions, the consequences are immediate and generational. Forced displacement is not merely a temporary inconvenience; it transforms social, economic, and political landscapes, hardening conflicts in ways that cannot be undone once military operations conclude.

Critically, the expansionist dimension is inseparable from historical memory. Maps from the early Zionist period, strategic discussions about the Litani, and contemporary military planning together form a continuum: a vision of territorial depth and demographic transformation that persists over decades. Recognizing this continuity does not suggest inevitability, but it does demand scrutiny. The current military logic is not neutral; it is the operational expression of long-standing ideological goals, rendered in the language of security and defense.

Policy choices in the present can still alter the trajectory. Adherence to international humanitarian law, targeted diplomacy, and external pressure could constrain the momentum of expansionist ambitions. Without these interventions, however, displacement, destruction, and occupation risk embedding a reality on the ground that mirrors historical maps—reifying ambitions that were once merely aspirational into tangible territorial change.

The conflict along the Litani is thus not merely a military confrontation; it is a test of whether historical expansionist ideologies will dictate the future of the region. Israel’s current operations serve as both a warning and a blueprint: for civilians, for neighboring states, and for the international community. The question is not only how the war is fought, but why—whether it is about immediate security or about advancing a long-standing project to reshape borders and demographics in pursuit of Greater Israel. Understanding this distinction is critical to analyzing the present and preparing for the post-war landscape.

The Iranian capital, Tehran, witnessed violent explosions shaking the northern neighborhoods of the city early this Friday morning, amidst a state of security and military alert. Field sources confirmed that the sounds of explosions coincided with reports of intense aerial activity in the region's skies, causing concern among local residents.

In a related development, official Iranian media reported that the airstrikes were not limited to the capital but also extended to targets in the city of Kashan, part of Isfahan province. The strikes also hit the cities of Tabriz and Urmia in the northwest of the country, indicating an expansion of Israeli targeting within Iranian territory.

For its part, the Israeli army issued an official statement announcing the conclusion of a wave of concentrated airstrikes targeting what it described as 'infrastructure belonging to the Iranian regime.' The statement clarified that the operations focused on the vicinity of Tehran, confirming that the aircraft returned safely to their bases after accurately executing their assigned missions.

In response to these raids, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard announced the launch of the eighty-third wave of 'Operation True Promise 4' against Israeli targets. The Revolutionary Guard clarified that this operation comes as part of a continuous response to Israeli and American military movements targeting Iranian sovereignty and vital facilities.

Sources from Tehran indicated that the new wave of attacks used a diverse arsenal of weapons, including long and medium-range missile systems. Suicide drones and multiple, precise warheads were also integrated into the attack to ensure bypassing air defense systems and reaching designated targets.

According to the Revolutionary Guard's statement, the Iranian strikes focused on sensitive economic and military facilities, including oil tanks and depots in various areas. The shelling also targeted a strategic military site in the coastal city of Ashdod, in addition to shelling the city of Modi'in in central Israel.

On the Israeli side, sirens blared continuously in greater Tel Aviv and surrounding areas, following the detection of a barrage of missiles launched from Iranian territory. Sources confirmed that a state of panic prevailed at Ben Gurion Airport and the city of Lod, where settlers rushed to shelters immediately after warning systems were activated.

Israeli military sources stated that air defenses launched interceptor missiles in an attempt to counter the widespread Iranian attack. Despite interception attempts, the exact extent of these systems' success in shooting down all targets is not yet clear, amidst reports of shrapnel and missiles falling in populated areas.

Preliminary reports indicate that Iran may have used cluster munitions in its latest attack, a type of weapon that Tehran has intensified its use of recently. Hebrew Channel 12 confirmed that a cluster missile fell in the central region, while the official broadcasting authority indicated the detection of shrapnel falling in three different locations.

This escalation comes in the context of an open confrontation that began in late February and has so far resulted in hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides. The region is experiencing a state of high alert amidst the continued exchange of missile strikes that have targeted prominent leaders, threatening to slide the situation towards a comprehensive regional war.

We have begun the 83rd wave of Operation True Promise 4 to include attacks on Israeli military sites and facilities.

Washington - Said Arikat - 27/3/2026

News Analysis

US President Donald Trump's statements on Thursday reveal structural contradictions in managing the confrontation with Iran, where the rhetoric of military decisiveness intersects with a tendency to keep the door to negotiation ajar, without a coherent strategy linking the two paths. His announcement that military operations are progressing at a "very advanced" pace not only attempts to market a quick achievement but also raises questions about the accuracy of initial assessments and the limits of declared objectives.

Trump's talk of exceeding the timeline for the operation, estimated between four and six weeks, cannot be separated from the political need to demonstrate superiority, especially given domestic sensitivities towards long wars. However, this rhetoric deliberately ignores the complexities of the field, where progress is not measured solely by time, but by the extent to which sustainable strategic goals are achieved. In this context, it appears that the US administration is confusing tactical achievement with strategic success, a confusion that has often led to prolonged crises in previous experiences.

More problematic is Trump's hesitation regarding concluding an agreement with Iran, despite acknowledging the Iranians' negotiating skill. This hesitation does not reflect calculated caution as much as it reveals the absence of a clear vision for the end of the conflict: Is the goal to change Iran's behavior, weaken it militarily, or impose a settlement on American terms? Leaving these questions open weakens the credibility of American discourse and gives Tehran wider room for maneuver.

Regarding the references to Iranian "signs of goodwill," such as allowing oil tankers to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, Trump's presentation of them seems closer to propaganda than to a realistic reading. Such steps, if true, might be part of an Iranian tactic to buy time or relieve pressure, and not necessarily evidence of a strategic shift. However, the US administration is quick to present them as proof of the success of military pressure, in an attempt to bolster its domestic narrative.

The vague talk of an Iranian "gift" in the energy sector reflects a recurring pattern in Trump's rhetoric of making grand statements without providing details, which opens the door to interpretations and undermines transparency. This ambiguity not only serves the negotiating tactic but also confuses allies and weakens confidence in the credibility of the American position, especially when coupled with a controversial proposal about the possibility of controlling Iranian oil.

This latter proposal clearly reveals the economic dimension of the American approach and raises questions about whether the war is also being driven by resource-related motives, and not just security or stability. Moreover, invoking the Venezuela model in this context reflects an oversimplification of fundamental differences between the two cases, reinforcing the impression that foreign policy is sometimes formulated with a transactional logic rather than a comprehensive strategic vision.

In contrast, the negotiating track, as presented by US envoy Steve Witkoff, appears to operate relatively independently of the President's political rhetoric. The reference to a "working list of 15 items" and the existence of "strong indications" of a potential settlement reflects a more traditional diplomatic effort, based on a mix of pressure and incentives. However, the success of this track remains contingent on its consistency with messages emanating from the White House, a consistency that seems to be missing so far.

The role of mediators, especially Pakistan, gains double importance in light of this disparity, as it constitutes a necessary channel to avoid misunderstandings between the two parties. But the increasing reliance on mediators also reflects a lack of direct trust and confirms that the crisis has not yet reached a stage of true negotiating maturity.

In this context, Trump's decision to extend the deadline for striking Iranian energy facilities by ten days, ending on April 6, can be read as additional evidence of a lack of decisiveness in decision-making. The move, presented as a response to an Iranian request, may in fact reflect hesitation to bear the consequences of escalation, especially if things get out of control. It also reveals a pattern of crisis management based on tactical retreat without a comprehensive reassessment of strategy.

Ultimately, the current American approach seems closer to daily crisis management than to a long-term strategy. The combination of military escalation, optimistic rhetoric, and the hint of negotiation, without a clear framework linking these elements, creates a state of ambiguity that could increase the risks of miscalculation. In an incendiary regional environment, such an approach not only threatens to prolong the conflict but also raises the probabilities of it sliding into a wider confrontation that would be difficult to contain.

Media sources reported a clear divergence in viewpoints between the Israeli government and the American administration, following a 15-point proposal submitted by Washington aimed at ending the ongoing military operations against Iran. These developments come at a sensitive time in the regional confrontation, as the United States seeks to impose a de-escalation that opens the door to a long-term diplomatic path.

Reports indicated that the American proposal was conveyed to the Iranian capital, Tehran, through Pakistani diplomatic channels, as part of international efforts to contain the escalation. The American plan includes a vision for declaring a temporary ceasefire lasting a full month, to serve as a confidence-building period before engaging in direct negotiations between the parties involved in the crisis.

For its part, official Iranian sources confirmed that Tehran had submitted its final response to the American proposal through intermediaries, emphasizing the necessity of meeting a set of sovereign conditions. The Iranian response included explicit demands for an end to all forms of attacks and assassinations on various fronts, in addition to obtaining international guarantees against the recurrence of military aggression in the future.

Tehran also insisted in its response on the necessity of obtaining financial and legal compensation for the damages it incurred as a result of recent military operations. Iranian officials affirmed the condition of full recognition of their country's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, considering it a red line that cannot be compromised in any future political settlement with the international community.

Within Israel, political sources revealed that objections are primarily focused on three strategic issues that Tel Aviv considers vital to its national security. These issues relate to the future formulation of Iran's ballistic missile program, the mechanism for transferring enriched uranium to the custody of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as the pace of economic sanctions relief.

Data indicates that discussions between the Israeli and American sides are still ongoing and intensive, as Tel Aviv attempts to introduce fundamental amendments to the proposed American formula. There is concern in Israeli circles that American flexibility could strengthen Tehran's regional standing without obtaining sufficient concessions on the nuclear and military files.

Sources quoted Israeli officials as saying that Iran has already begun to use language suggesting the imminent end of the war, but at the same time, it is raising its demands to an unprecedented level. These officials believe that Tehran is trying to exploit the American desire for de-escalation to achieve political and economic gains that exceed the current reality on the ground.

There are growing Israeli fears regarding the intentions of US President Donald Trump, who may seek to impose a temporary ceasefire as a fait accompli to advance negotiations with Tehran. Israel fears that this approach could restrict its freedom of military action against Iranian targets before achieving the strategic objectives for which the war began.

On the diplomatic front, no official date has yet been set for a direct meeting between the American and Iranian delegations, despite the noticeable activity of Pakistani mediation. Meanwhile, intelligence assessments suggested that Iran might resort to carrying out large-scale missile attacks as 'final strikes' to strengthen its negotiating position before signing any agreement.

It is worth noting that this direct military confrontation erupted on February 28th, and witnessed an intensive exchange of missile shelling and drone attacks. While international efforts for de-escalation continue, tension remains dominant due to mutual distrust, especially with Tehran's indication of being deceived in previous negotiation experiences.

Iran is indeed speaking the language of the final phase of the war, but it is still putting forward significant demands during ongoing communications.

Iran's Kharg Island stands out as one of the most strategically sensitive points in the Middle East, representing the lifeblood of the Iranian economy. Approximately 95% of crude oil exports pass through this island, making it a primary target in any potential military confrontation between Tehran and Washington.

Military analyses indicate that the administration of US President Donald Trump may not seek to destroy the island, but rather considers the option of controlling it to impose a new political and economic reality. This approach is based on the idea of acquiring resources instead of destroying them, which places the island at the heart of a strategic battle of wills.

In contrast, Tehran has not stood idly by in the face of these threats. Intelligence reports have revealed actual movements to strengthen defenses within the island. These measures included deploying additional forces and developing air defense systems to repel any aerial or ground infiltration attempts.

Iranian forces have taken advanced field steps by planting extensive anti-personnel and anti-armor minefields in the coastal areas of the island. This step aims to impede any amphibious landing operations that US forces might carry out in the most vulnerable areas.

Iran has reinforced its defensive arsenal on the island with shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, posing a direct threat to helicopters and close air support aircraft. This step aims to make the island's skies a no-fly zone for any aerial intervention that paves the way for ground forces.

Leaked reports circulating speak of the Pentagon studying plans involving Marine forces and specialized landing units, in addition to elements of the 82nd Airborne Division. These hypothetical plans aim to tighten control over oil facilities and turn them into a tool of maximum political pressure.

Military experts warn that any attempt to control Kharg Island would be extremely costly in terms of human lives and material resources. The island is located only 25 kilometers from the Iranian coast, placing attacking forces within range of ballistic missiles and suicide drones.

The island boasts dense natural and artificial fortifications that make an assault operation an uncertain venture. Despite US technological superiority, the geographical proximity to the Iranian mainland gives Tehran the advantage of a rapid and intensive response to any hostile force.

Kharg Island's great importance lies in its enormous loading capacity, reaching 7 million barrels of oil per day. The island is one of the largest oil export terminals in the world, with an area about one-third the size of Manhattan, making its control a complete command over the energy market.

These developments have sparked a wave of widespread debate on social media platforms, with observers considering any military action to be a strategic suicide. Commentators noted that Washington might try to repeat previous scenarios for controlling resources, but Kharg's geographical nature is completely different.

Media sources reported that the preparation of American public opinion for a ground war scenario has already begun through news channels close to the administration. Analysts believe that the goal may be to force Tehran to negotiate under the pressure of occupying Iran's oil "crown jewel."

Activists recalled bitter historical experiences of US forces in amphibious landing operations, likening Kharg Island to Japan's Iwo Jima Island in World War II. They emphasize that the high human cost may prevent Washington from making a decision for a direct ground attack.

Anticipation remains the order of the day in the Gulf, as Kharg Island turns into a powder keg that could explode at any moment. Between Iranian defensive preparations and American offensive plans, global energy security remains dependent on the fate of this strategic island.

Control over Kharg Island means direct influence on the global energy market and control over 95% of Iranian oil exports.

Settler groups turned the atmosphere of Eid al-Fitr in the town of Al-Fandaqumiya, south of Jenin city, into a real nightmare, following a widespread attack targeting the southern area of the town. More than 200 settlers launched from the 'Homesh' settlement, which is built on citizens' lands, to carry out organized attacks that targeted stone and people under the cover of darkness.

The home of citizen Hassan Al-Zaabi was subjected to a deliberate arson attack that almost claimed the lives of his family members who were on a family visit at the moment of the attack. The assailants removed parts of the tiled roof and threw flammable materials inside the rooms, leading to the complete charring of the house and the explosion of its windows due to the intense heat from the fire.

Al-Zaabi described what happened as a full-fledged murder attempt, noting that the timing of the attack just before midnight reflects a premeditated intention to cause casualties among those sleeping. The family is now living in a state of dispersion and loss after losing their only shelter, as its members were forced to seek refuge in relatives' homes amidst a complete lack of security.

Ibrahim Al-Zaabi's home was not far from the targeting, as settlers surprised his family while they were sitting inside the house by smashing windows and throwing Molotov cocktails. The attack resulted in the burning of his private vehicle and damage to household furniture, while his wife was taken to the hospital due to severe suffocation from the thick smoke.

Local sources reported that the distance between the 'Homesh' settlement and Palestinian homes has significantly diminished in recent months. After the settlement was about three kilometers away, mobile homes (caravans) crept closer to become less than one kilometer away, making residents easy targets for daily attacks.

Rafat Qarariya, head of the local council in Al-Fandaqumiya, confirmed that the attacks aim to terrorize peaceful residents and force them to leave their lands near the settlement. He explained that the latest damage statistics included the complete burning of one house and partial burning of three houses, in addition to the destruction of four vehicles and widespread damage to property.

Qarariya pointed out that the residents were forced to confront the settlers with their bare chests in the absence of any official protection, as hundreds of young men rushed to repel the attack and prevent a massacre. These attacks are part of a escalating series of assaults that have intensified sharply since October 2023.

The 'Homesh' settlement has witnessed a frightening settlement expansion, with its area doubling to about 2000 dunams after it was no more than 700 dunams. This expansion comes at the expense of the lands of the villages of Burqa, Jaba, and Beit Imrin, benefiting from occupation decisions that legalized the return to previously evacuated settlements.

In an attempt to strengthen popular steadfastness, the village council announced the formation of 'local protection committees' to monitor settler movements and confront their attacks. Practical measures have also begun to distribute manual fire extinguishers and install iron barriers on the windows of threatened homes to reduce the effects of Molotov cocktails.

For his part, Salah Al-Khawaja, an official in the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission, explained that the occupation completely disavows its responsibilities to compensate affected Palestinians. He affirmed that the commission is trying to provide possible assistance to restore burned homes in coordination with international organizations, despite the financial blockade imposed on official institutions.

Data from the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission indicates that the West Bank has witnessed about 7700 attacks since the start of the war on Gaza, reflecting a systematic policy to impose a new reality. The commission recorded more than 680 direct arson attacks on properties during the current and past two years, indicating the seriousness of the stage.

The events in Al-Fandaqumiya coincided with a wave of attacks that included 21 Palestinian towns in just two days, resulting in injuries to dozens of citizens. Observers believe that these attacks are not spontaneous but are carried out with coordination and protection from occupation forces that provide cover for settlers while they commit their crimes.

Residents of areas adjacent to settlements suffer from immense psychological and social pressures due to the lack of stability and constant fear for their children's lives. Residents confirm that repairing burned walls does not heal the psychological scars left by the terror, especially with the continued threats of returning again.

Palestinian steadfastness in these villages remains the last line of defense against the ambitions of settlement expansion that devours Palestinian land day by day. Residents demand the urgent provision of international protection to stop the encroachment of settlers who have become a second army targeting the Palestinian presence in the West Bank.

Settlers set fire knowing the possibility of sleeping residents inside; what happened was a deliberate murder attempt.

Eyal Zamir, a senior commander in the occupation army, issued a resounding warning to the mini-cabinet, confirming that the military establishment is on the verge of internal collapse. Zamir explained that the continuation of wars on multiple fronts, coupled with the increasing security tasks to protect settlers, has led to an unprecedented depletion of manpower.

Zamir indicated in his statement, reported by media sources, that current government policies have radically changed the face of the region, imposing burdens that exceed the capacity of current soldiers. He stressed that he is presenting ministers with ten strategic warnings that must be addressed immediately before the military system loses its ability to cohere and operate.

For his part, Major General Avi Bluth, commander of the Central Command, supported these concerns by pointing out that the intensive settlement expansion in the Jordan Valley and the West Bank over the past year has created a complex security reality. Bluth confirmed that the establishment of dozens of new farms and settlement areas requires a huge defensive package and additional manpower that the army currently does not have.

These warnings come at a sensitive time, as the mandatory service period is scheduled to be reduced to only thirty months early next year, a decision strongly opposed by army leaders. Observers believe that the absence of a fair conscription law that includes all groups, including the Haredim, places the burden of service on a limited segment of Israeli society.

In the context of political reactions, opposition leader Yair Lapid launched a sharp attack on the government, holding it fully responsible for any future security catastrophe that may occur. Lapid pledged to take strict financial measures against service evaders, stressing that the next government will work to mobilize everyone to end the state of discrimination in bearing burdens.

In turn, former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett criticized the government's inability to provide security, pointing to a severe shortage of up to twenty thousand soldiers in the ranks of combat forces. Bennett considered that the political decision being held hostage to the interests of religious parties prevents victory and weakens the state's military readiness in the face of threats.

Yair Golan, head of the Democratic Party, described the government's stance as 'obtuse' and detached from the field reality experienced by reserve soldiers and their families. Golan affirmed that ignoring the cries of military leaders represents a direct attack on national security, warning of the consequences of mocking the demands of the security establishment.

Gadi Eisenkot, former Chief of Staff, stressed that the political and military leadership cannot claim ignorance after these explicit and clear warnings. Eisenkot called for the necessity of applying the mandatory service law to everyone without exception, considering it a national and conscientious duty to ensure the continued survival of the state and its defensive capabilities.

These developments reflect the depth of the internal crisis experienced by the occupation, where political issues intertwine with field military needs amid ongoing confrontations. Leaked reports reveal a state of frustration among senior leaders as a result of the political level's disregard for repeated professional warnings regarding the erosion of manpower.

The Israeli army will collapse on itself, as you have approved the establishment of an escalating number of settlements, and the region has completely changed.

Security agencies in the Czech Republic are conducting extensive investigations into the arson incident that targeted facilities belonging to LPP Holding in the city of Pardubice, a company specializing in drone technology. The incident, which occurred about a week ago, garnered widespread attention after an enigmatic group calling itself the 'Earthquake Faction' claimed full responsibility for the operation.

The group stated in an official statement issued recently that the attack directly targeted the 'Center of Excellence' operated by the company in cooperation with the Israeli military industry giant 'Elbit Systems'. The statement accused the Czech company of contributing to the development of combat technologies used by the Israeli occupation army in its military operations against civilians in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.

According to the group's claim, the attack was not limited to causing material damage to the factory and warehouses, but also included the seizure of a set of documents described as 'highly confidential'. The 'Earthquake Faction' threatened to publish these documents publicly if the company did not comply with its demands to cut all forms of cooperation with the Israeli side by no later than April 20th.

The group identifies itself as a 'secret international network' operating independently and aiming to strike vital interests and companies that support the Israeli war machine from within. It affirmed in its published literature that its strategy relies on 'direct action' to disrupt the flow of weapons and technologies that are tested on the bodies of Palestinians before being exported to the world.

For its part, the Czech police announced progress in the investigations by arresting three individuals suspected of direct involvement in the attack, including an Egyptian young man holding American citizenship named Youssef Morsi. The detainees are currently undergoing intensive interrogations on charges related to terrorism and belonging to an illegal organization aiming to destabilize security and public order.

Youssef Morsi, one of the main detainees, is a student at the Faculty of Humanities at the prestigious Charles University in Prague, and is known for his extensive human rights activism. Local reports indicate that Morsi is active in supporting the Palestinian cause and minority rights, and works as a photographer documenting humanitarian and social issues in Europe.

Security sources reported that the arrest operation was coordinated between Czech and Slovak authorities, where one of the suspects was apprehended outside Czech borders while attempting to travel. The Public Prosecutor's Office in Prague considers this case a serious threat to national security, given the nature of the chosen targets and their connection to sensitive defense industries.

In contrast, LPP Holding quickly denied the accusations of producing drones for Israel, noting that its activity is currently focused on supporting Ukrainian forces. The company clarified that it has supplied Kyiv with hundreds of drones equipped with artificial intelligence technologies to counter the Russian invasion, affirming its commitment to international laws.

Despite the company's denial, the 'Earthquake Faction' insisted in its escalating statement that the partnership between LPP and 'Elbit Systems' is a partnership based on 'genocide'. The statement indicated that the collapse of the factory roof due to the fire is a symbol of the collapse of military partnerships that profit from the blood of children in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Czech media sources confirmed that the fire caused the suspension of production lines at Archer-LPP, a subsidiary of the group, which is responsible for supplying night vision devices and thermal imaging. This suspension may directly affect contracts for the supply of this sensitive equipment to international entities, thus multiplying the company's economic losses.

The group emphasized in its warning messages that all companies cooperating with 'Elbit Systems' around the world are legitimate targets for its upcoming operations. It stated that it would not waste its time 'pleading with complicit governments', but would continue to shake the ground under the feet of those it described as 'patrons of the colonizers' everywhere.

The Public Prosecutor in Prague, Zdeněk Štěpánek, stated that the authorities would not tolerate such subversive acts targeting industrial facilities on its territory. He added that investigations would reveal whether there are other partners or dormant cells of this international network within Czech territory or in neighboring European countries.

Industrial military circles in Europe are experiencing a state of anxiety after this attack, fearing a repeat of similar operations targeting suppliers and technical partners of the Israeli army. Human rights organizations are monitoring the course of Youssef Morsi and his companions' trial, amid fears of politicizing the case or using anti-terrorism laws to silence political activists.

Anticipation remains high as the deadline set by the 'Earthquake Faction' approaches on the twentieth of next month, with everyone waiting to see if the group will carry out its threat to publish the documents. This incident raises profound questions about the extent of independent groups' ability to influence global military supply chains through direct field operations.

As long as the land bleeds under the bombs of the Israeli occupation in Palestine, the ground must shake under the feet of its patrons.

The repercussions of the ongoing military confrontation extend beyond the security field, striking at the core of psychological and social stability within Israeli society, which has begun to directly reflect on economic indicators. Experts believe that the state of uncertainty and constant tension has become a hidden front of attrition, draining the human and financial resources of the Hebrew state unprecedentedly.

Professor Itamar Grotto, a former official at the Israeli Ministry of Health, confirmed that the current reality is not characterized by a transient shocking event but by cumulative and continuous psychological pressure. He explained that repeated alerts, disruption of daily routines, and a constant sense of threat have become crucial factors in the decline of macroeconomic performance and the efficiency of the workforce.

Medical data indicate a steady and alarming increase in the consumption of antidepressants and anxiety medications among Israelis since the outbreak of fighting. This shift not only reflects an increase in demand for treatment but also points to a structural change in workers' ability to maintain stable performance levels, exacerbating the productivity crisis.

Economic repercussions are clearly manifested in increased absenteeism and the spread of professional burnout among employees in various sectors. Companies and employers bear exorbitant costs, whether direct through healthcare or indirect through the decline in the quality of overall economic output.

The mental health system in Israel is under immense pressure, exceeding its capacity, as it faces a severe shortage of specialists and wide gaps in access to services. Experts warn that the absence of comprehensive solutions to this medical crisis poses an imminent economic danger threatening the country's future growth.

The deterioration in the psychological conditions of Israelis directly affects workforce participation, the stability of the educational system, and family cohesion. These elements, which are fundamental pillars of any prosperous economy, are now at stake due to continuous psychological pressures that prevent individuals from realizing their potential.

Long-term costs of continuous treatment and lost workdays add to the burden of debt and financial obligations resulting from military operations. Observers believe that this accumulated burden may lead to large segments of the population permanently leaving the workforce, reducing growth rates for years to come.

The psychological reactions witnessed in Israeli society are not abnormal individual cases but a natural human response to a reality characterized by constant pressure and uncertainty. This situation requires a comprehensive governmental response that goes beyond security solutions to include massive investments in social and psychological infrastructure.

Even if military operations cease, the psychological repercussions will not disappear overnight but will continue to haunt the economy for long periods. Signs of recession are already appearing on the horizon, amidst serious questions about the public budget's ability to bear the cost of recovery from these side effects.

For his part, writer Kobi Arieli points out that self-employed individuals are experiencing continuous anguish due to successive financial losses and fear of the future. These individuals, who have learned from bitter experiences over the past two years, find themselves today unable to plan or act in the charged atmosphere.

The state of uncertainty accompanying workers is one of the most dangerous manifestations of economic consequences, as production and sales cycles that require temporal stability are disrupted. Under continuous missile alerts, the possibility of preparing for sales or advancing commercial projects is non-existent, leading to a state of partial paralysis in the market.

Israel is currently facing what is described as its fourth economic crisis in recent years, starting from the coronavirus pandemic to multi-front wars. A major question mark hangs over the private sector's ability to withstand, especially with the repeated scenario of 'one step forward and two steps back' imposed by the security reality.

Investing in mental health is no longer a social luxury but has become an urgent economic necessity to ensure the productive system remains capable of functioning. Without radical intervention, the invisible costs of war may exceed the destructive impact of the direct costs of weapons and military equipment.

Ultimately, the Israeli economy finds itself trapped between the hammer of massive military expenditures and the anvil of the psychological collapse of its human resources. Reports confirm that failure to address psychological aspects will inevitably lead to a deep recession that will be difficult to emerge from even after the guns fall silent.

Repeated alerts and routine disruption are not just a personal challenge but a factor with a devastating cumulative impact on macroeconomic performance.

Former US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, made striking statements in which he acknowledged that parts of the humanitarian suffering experienced by Palestinians during the war on the Gaza Strip could have been avoided. Blinken indicated that the final judgment on the decisions made by his administration during that period would be left to history and the assessment of global public opinion, implicitly acknowledging the extent of the controversy sparked by US foreign policy.

The former US official explained that Israeli society experienced a deep shock that led to the emergence of a strong will to continue military operations in the Strip. According to his estimates, this determination was so strong that the war would have continued and taken its course even if the United States had decided to intervene directly or reduce its military support, reflecting the complexity of the field and political landscape at the time.

In response to questions regarding the continued supply of weapons to Israel despite accusations of genocide by human rights organizations and researchers, Blinken described this issue as one of the most difficult challenges he faced. Blinken openly questioned whether the administration should have acted differently to protect thousands of children and civilians, answering his own question with the phrase 'perhaps yes,' which opens the door for belated policy reviews.

Blinken revealed that the option of cutting military supplies to Israel was indeed on the table for discussion within the US administration, but it was ruled out for several strategic considerations. Sources indicated that the administration believed this measure would not be sufficient to change the course of the war in the short term, and might instead cause a wider regional explosion as a result of hostile parties seeking to exploit the situation.

The former Secretary stressed that the American vision was based on the belief that the optimal and only solution to ensure the protection of civilians lay in reaching a comprehensive ceasefire agreement. This path, he said, aimed to ensure the release of hostages and the sustainable flow of humanitarian aid to the residents of the Strip who faced catastrophic living and health conditions.

Blinken concluded his remarks by emphasizing that ending the conflict and protecting lives required a diplomatic path leading to a comprehensive de-escalation rather than taking steps that could lead to an escalation of the confrontation. He believed that US efforts focused on trying to balance military support with humanitarian pressure, despite widespread criticism directed at Washington for ignoring the scale of the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.

Could we or should we have acted differently to avoid civilian suffering and the loss of thousands of children? The short answer: perhaps yes.

The intensity of military confrontations in South Lebanon escalated today, Thursday, as Israeli occupation forces committed new massacres, resulting in the martyrdom of 22 citizens and the injury of 110 others. With this bloody toll, the total number of victims of the ongoing Israeli aggression since the beginning of March has risen to 1116 martyrs and more than 3200 injured, amidst continued air raids and intense artillery shelling.

On the ground, Hezbollah announced the implementation of a series of qualitative operations against gatherings and vehicles of the occupation army, most notably targeting a 'Merkava' tank in the border town of Al-Qantara using a kamikaze drone, confirming a direct hit. The resistance also targeted gatherings of Israeli soldiers and vehicles with missiles in the vicinity of the municipality of Khiam, as part of confronting attempts at ground infiltration.

In contrast, the Israeli occupation army admitted the killing of one of its soldiers and the injury of two officers and two soldiers with varying degrees of wounds, after their force was hit by an anti-tank missile during the ongoing battles in the South. These admissions coincide with the announcement by the Northern Command of the Israeli army of a decision to expand ground operations, in an attempt to impose what it called a new 'security zone' within Lebanese territory.

Regarding the missile response, media sources reported that Hezbollah launched a large missile barrage exceeding 30 missiles, targeting the city of Nahariya and wide areas in the Western Galilee and Haifa Bay. Sirens repeatedly sounded in those areas, while loud explosions were heard resulting from the fall of missiles and Israeli aerial interception attempts.

Field sources confirmed that the occupation is currently seeking to expand the fighting front to include the axis extending from the town of Taybeh to Deir Seryan and Al-Qantara, areas located deep within the second and third defensive lines. These Israeli movements aim to reach sensitive strategic points such as Wadi Al-Hujeir and Wadi Al-Salouqi, which are of great importance in the military geography of the region.

In a related context, Hebrew reports stated that two people were injured in northern Israel due to the crash of a drone launched from Lebanon, reflecting the resistance's ability to penetrate defensive systems despite the intensity of fire. The occupation army also claimed to have assassinated a prominent commander in Hezbollah's anti-tank missile system in an airstrike carried out yesterday.

Military analysis of recent developments indicates that the occupation is trying to bypass the towns of Al-Qantara and Deir Seryan to reach the banks of the Litani River, which explains the ferocity of the ground confrontations in those axes. The invading forces face fierce resistance that prevents them from consolidating their positions, as supply lines and vehicles are continuously targeted with appropriate weapons.

Politically and socially, Lebanon is experiencing harsh humanitarian conditions with the continued displacement of thousands from border villages and the destruction of infrastructure due to indiscriminate shelling. International warnings are increasing about the situation sliding into an uncontrollable comprehensive war, given the occupation's insistence on expanding the scope of its military operations and its rejection of ceasefire initiatives.

At the internal Lebanese level, these developments coincided with a state of popular and political anger, as ministers representing key political forces boycotted a government session in protest against some diplomatic decisions. Meanwhile, cultural circles mourned the committed artist Ahmed Kaabour, who passed away leaving an artistic legacy associated with the resistance and the Palestinian and Lebanese causes.

The field scene remains dominant, with attention focused on the resistance's ability to deplete the occupation forces in the rugged areas of South Lebanon. With the continued missile barrages reaching Haifa and Tel Aviv, it seems that the deterrence equation remains in place despite the Israeli army's attempts to change the geographical reality on the border.

The occupation is trying to reach Wadi Al-Hujeir and Wadi Al-Salouqi, which are strategic points that may pave the way for its arrival at the Litani River.

Recently, a state of rampant desire for bloody revenge has escalated within Israeli circles, paving the way for the Knesset to vote on a law allowing the execution of Palestinian prisoners. These moves come amid a charged public atmosphere demanding maximum penalties against perpetrators of operations, without considering the long-term strategic consequences of this decision.

In this context, Ariel Mari, a researcher at the Institute for Counter-Terrorism Policy at Reichman University, warned that succumbing to emotions could harm Israeli security. He explained in an analysis published by Maariv newspaper that the shock resulting from major operations evokes a desire for severe punishment, but public policies require prioritizing rationality over momentary emotional reactions.

Research sources indicated that the death penalty for Palestinian prisoners will not only fail to deter Palestinian organizations but may also cause real damage to ongoing security efforts. Scientific studies in criminology do not provide conclusive evidence that execution reduces ordinary crime rates, let alone operations with national ideological motives.

Observers believe that Palestinian resistance fighters act based on a sense of mission and a complete readiness for sacrifice, which makes the threat of execution an ineffective means. Organizations that send their members to carry out attacks, knowing in advance the possibility of their death, will not back down from the possibility of their execution after capture.

Furthermore, the death penalty could turn into a powerful propaganda tool in the hands of Palestinian factions, as those executed will be portrayed as national symbols and martyrs. This would encourage the recruitment of more young people into the ranks of the resistance, leading to results completely contrary to what the law aims for.

Strategically, serious concerns arise that the issuance of death sentences could lead to a wave of kidnappings of Israelis or Jews around the world. Palestinian organizations would seek, through these operations, to pressure the Israeli government to revoke the sentences or exchange hostages for convicted prisoners.

The Israeli government faces a real dilemma if this law is implemented, especially since it has a long history of succumbing to exchange operations. It is difficult to imagine any government being able to proceed with an execution while the lives of Israeli hostages hang on a decision to halt the execution.

Implementing the death penalty will put Israel in a political and public predicament. Retreating from the sentence under pressure will be interpreted as surrender to Palestinian organizations. Conversely, insisting on implementation despite threats could lead to the death of hostages, which would ignite internal public anger against the political leadership.

Analyses confirm that combating armed operations requires a calm and deliberate policy, far from reactions driven by anger and pain. The pursuit of a temporary feeling of retributive justice may undermine the foundations of real security and create international and local crises that the occupation cannot easily contain.

In conclusion, it appears that the Knesset's vote on the law reflects purely vengeful motives lacking sound legal or political depth. Instead of contributing to reducing resistance, the law may give it new momentum and additional means of pressure, ultimately leading to 'the magic turning against the magician'.

The real question is not what achieves a temporary feeling of justice, but what actually contributes to achieving security away from emotional impulses.

Iranian media reports revealed today, Wednesday, a new escalation in the language of military threat towards neighboring countries, as "Hamshahri" newspaper confirmed that the armed forces have established a target bank that includes strategic and vital sites in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the State of Kuwait on its military table. This step comes amid the ongoing intense military confrontations between Iran on the one hand, and the United States and Israel on the other, which have escalated unprecedentedly recently.

The newspaper quoted a high-ranking Iranian official, who preferred to remain anonymous, as saying that any move described as "hostile" against the Islamic Republic would be met with a direct and decisive military response. The official explained that the military leadership no longer rules out any options in defending its sovereignty, noting that operational plans are ready for implementation if Iranian interests are subjected to further direct targeting by international powers.

According to media sources, the list of potential targets mainly includes the joint oil region between Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, in addition to the major oil fields in the Wafra and Burgan areas. These facilities are considered essential pillars of the global economy and energy, making the threat to target them a dangerous development that threatens the stability of international oil supplies and regional security in the Arabian Gulf region.

The threats were not limited to oil facilities but extended to the energy and electricity sector, as reports stated that the power stations in "Al-Zour" and "Al-Shuaiba" are included in the list of military responses. The list also included other strategic infrastructures that were not detailed but were described as vital and influential, reflecting Tehran's desire to create a new deterrence equation that includes interests associated with the American presence in the region.

The region has been experiencing a continuous war since February 28, during which Israel and the United States launched a series of intense military raids and operations inside Iranian territory. These attacks resulted in hundreds of deaths, including high-ranking leaders in the power hierarchy, most notably Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which prompted Tehran to respond by launching waves of missiles and drones towards Israeli targets.

In a related context, sources reported that Tehran has already begun targeting what it describes as American sites and interests within the territories of Arab countries, considering them a starting point for hostile operations against it. However, these attacks were met with widespread condemnation from the targeted countries, especially after civilian casualties occurred and severe damage was inflicted on civilian facilities, amid international demands for the necessity of sparing Arab countries the repercussions of the direct conflict between major powers.

For their part, political circles in the Gulf states expressed their deep concern about these threats, stressing that the countries of the region have made intensive diplomatic efforts to prevent the situation from sliding into an all-out war. These circles emphasized that neighboring countries categorically rejected the use of their lands or airspace to launch attacks against Iran, warning that targeting Gulf economic facilities would harm all peoples of the region without exception.

Observers believe that the current Iranian threats aim to pressure Washington through its regional allies to stop the ongoing military operations against military and nuclear infrastructure in Iran. However, experts warn that targeting oil fields and power stations could lead to broader international intervention and perhaps accelerate the pace of military operations aimed at undermining the capabilities of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and preventing it from threatening navigation and global trade.

Amid this escalating tension, world capitals are awaiting the seriousness of these threats, especially with the continued air raids targeting Iranian depth almost daily. Concerns remain about the conflict turning into a comprehensive regional war that destroys everything, at a time when major powers are calling for restraint and a return to diplomatic channels to avoid an economic and security catastrophe that could destabilize the Middle East for many years.

Any hostile step against Iran will lead to a military response that includes strategic infrastructure in the region.

An analysis published by 'Foreign Affairs' magazine revealed a deep gap between the pragmatic claims of US President Donald Trump's administration and the reality of its foreign policy implementation on the ground. Researchers Rebecca Lissner and Mira Rapp-Hooper pointed out that the current war against Iran demonstrated an approach based on excessive force and coercion, far from the strategic discipline imposed by the realist school.

Despite attempts by Trump's team to portray its global moves as part of a 'flexible realism' inspired by classical intellectual traditions, the facts on the ground indicate the exact opposite. The realist school, which rejects idealism and focuses on protecting strict national interests, now finds itself in contradiction with the administration's decisions that have drawn Washington into an unresolved regional conflict.

Data indicates that this war, which entered its twenty-sixth day, has cost the US Treasury at least $20 billion by the end of March. This massive spending comes at a time when the administration suffers from a lack of a clear vision on how to translate this military power into tangible political gains or sustainable stability in the region.

Continuous strikes have led to the depletion of vital ammunition and the transfer of strategic assets, such as missile defense systems and radars, from other vital areas. Observers believe that this trend weakens the US military's readiness to confront larger challenges in the Indo-Pacific, undermining strategic deterrence against major powers like China and Russia.

In stark contrast to his electoral promises to end 'endless wars,' Trump adopted the goal of 'regime change' in Tehran as a central pillar of his military campaign. This approach is rejected by realist thinkers who believe that the costs of changing the internal nature of states are often exorbitant and lead to geopolitical chaos that does not serve national interests.

On the ground, the war has caused a near-complete paralysis of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, with shipping traffic declining by up to 97%. This disruption has not only affected global energy supplies but has also led to severe economic losses for the Arab region, estimated at approximately $63 billion within just two weeks of fighting.

Diplomatically, sources reported that Trump showed a surprising willingness to negotiate by announcing a five-day halt to attacks on Iranian energy facilities. This signal came after his envoy, Steve Witkoff, received approval from Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to begin talks, in an attempt to contain the escalating situation that had spiraled out of control.

Domestically, Trump faces increasing public pressure as his approval rating has fallen to 36%, with 61% of Americans opposing the continuation of military operations. It appears that the American voter who cast their ballot for Trump based on promises of 'America First' and avoiding foreign interventions now feels deceived by the engagement in a new Middle Eastern conflict.

Reports confirm that the US administration rushed into the conflict without an accurate assessment of escalation dynamics, as the evacuation of diplomats from the region was delayed until hostilities actually began. The President also expressed surprise at the sharp rise in global oil prices, reflecting a lack of coordination between military objectives and macroeconomic repercussions.

The regional aviation sector also suffered losses, with over 18,400 flights canceled at nine major airports in the region. These losses, amounting to $1.9 billion, reflect the extent of damage to civilian and economic infrastructure resulting from the war decision, which was described as reckless and ill-considered.

In a related context, sources revealed that Mossad Director David Barnea presented plans to Netanyahu claiming that targeting Iranian leaders would lead to a popular uprising and the collapse of the regime. It appears that these intelligence estimates, adopted by circles close to Trump such as Jared Kushner, were what pushed for the current military escalation and bypassed diplomatic options.

The concept of 'flexible realism' promoted by the 2025 National Security Strategy seems to be a cover to justify the use of force without legal or international constraints. Statements describing the world as governed only by 'laws of force and coercion' ignore the importance of alliances and international law in maintaining long-term American hegemony.

Instead of focusing on strategic competition with China, Washington found itself bogged down in the sands of the Middle East once again, giving Beijing an opportunity to strengthen its economic and political influence. This strategic distraction is precisely what true realists warned against, advocating for avoiding 'overextension' that drains the state's resources and power.

In conclusion, Trump's war on Iran represents an opportunity for American political forces to re-evaluate the course of foreign policy and return to a more disciplined approach. The popular demand for a practical foreign policy that respects financial and political constraints has become an urgent necessity to restore the United States' respect and position in an increasingly complex international system.

Igniting a regional war in the Middle East without convincing justification or a clear theory to advance US interests starkly contradicts the fundamental principles of political realism.

Palestinian factions, national forces, and tribal gatherings in the Gaza Strip expressed their strong condemnation of the plan proposed by former UN envoy Nikolay Mladenov, which aims to disarm the Strip through a gradual, multi-stage process. The proposed plan is based on the principle of parallel implementation between Hamas's commitments and Israeli measures within a specific timeline, which Palestinian forces considered an attempt to extract political and security gains for the occupation.

The Islamic Jihad movement affirmed that the resistance's weapons represent public property of the Palestinian people and a legitimate tool for self-defense and achieving major national goals. The movement stressed that the priority must be to end the occupation of Palestinian land and establish an independent state, considering any talk of disarmament while aggression continues as a distortion of facts and a disregard for the roots of the conflict.

For its part, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine warned against succumbing to calls for surrendering weapons without guaranteeing legitimate national rights. The Front clarified that resistance is a right guaranteed by international laws in the face of occupation and continuous violations, noting that the absence of international protection is what drives the Palestinian people to adhere to their defensive options to protect their existence from genocidal policies.

In the same context, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine emphasized its rejection of any distortion in international settlement plans that serves the Israeli agenda. The Front affirmed that any arrangements related to the security situation or weapons must stem from a unified Palestinian stance that places the interests of the people above all other considerations, warning against the occupation's attempts to achieve what it failed to achieve militarily through diplomatic channels.

On the popular level, gatherings of Palestinian clans and tribes announced that the resistance's weapons represent a collective guarantee that cannot be relinquished before the complete disappearance of the occupation. The tribes clarified in separate statements that the utmost priority at the present time must be to stop the war and provide urgent relief to citizens, instead of being preoccupied with schemes aimed at weakening the Palestinian internal front.

Ismail Al-Sindawi, a leader in Islamic Jihad, explained that the core of the crisis lies in the existence of the occupation itself, not in the weapons, which are a natural result of confronting this occupation. Al-Sindawi pointed out that the United States plays a negative role by providing military and political cover for the occupation's crimes, making it a direct partner in the suffering of Palestinians, calling on the international community to compel Israel to abide by signed agreements.

In turn, the Public Relations Department of the Islamic Jihad movement called for international efforts to focus on establishing a ceasefire, ending the war of extermination, and lifting the unjust siege on the Gaza Strip. It affirmed that Mladenov's plan should have included clear mechanisms to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their basic rights to shelter and reconstruction, instead of proposing suggestions that affect the defensive capabilities of the resistance.

In a political reading of the situation, Omar Murad, a member of the Political Bureau of the Popular Front, considered that the Palestinians' resort to arms is a natural reaction to the continuous crimes in the face of absolute international silence. Murad affirmed that any proposal that bypasses the people's right to resistance contributes to opening the way for the occupation to escalate its policies of killing and displacement, stressing that this historical right does not lapse with time, no matter how great the pressures.

Murad called for strengthening national unity as a fundamental pillar to confront schemes aimed at liquidating the Palestinian cause or distorting the resistance project. He called on the international community to take serious steps to stop Israeli violations and enable Palestinians to exercise their sovereignty, affirming that the Palestinian people will remain steadfast in their principles until the establishment of their state on all their national soil.

For his part, Qais Abdul Karim, a member of the Political Bureau of the Democratic Front, pointed out fundamental differences between the current proposals and what was previously circulated in international political circles. Abdul Karim affirmed that attempts to adapt international plans to suit Israeli demands are completely rejected, calling for the formulation of a unified national strategy to deal with all proposed political initiatives.

The National Gathering of Tribes and Clans criticized the performance of international envoy Nikolay Mladenov, considering that he failed in carrying out his humanitarian and political duties. Alaa El-Din Al-Aklouk, a member of the Gathering's leadership, affirmed that weapons are not exclusive to a particular faction but belong to the people, and there can be no talk of surrendering them before the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state that ends the last occupation in the contemporary world.

Al-Aklouk questioned the international community's ability to provide genuine guarantees for Palestinian security, at a time when it has so far failed to deliver food and medicine to those besieged. He stressed that the tribes support political endeavors aimed at de-escalating the situation, but not on the basis of withdrawing weapons, but on the basis of extracting national rights and stopping the ongoing aggression.

In a firm stance, Sheikh Salem Al-Soufi, head of the Bedouin Tribes Gathering, said that weapons represent the 'soul' of the Palestinian people who were left alone to face the war of extermination. Al-Soufi recalled the history of Israeli massacres from Deir Yassin until today, affirming that the absence of international protection for decades is what made the possession of weapons an existential necessity to defend dignity and land.

The tribal and factional events concluded their positions by affirming that the popular base of the resistance will not allow any infringement on its weapons under any pretext. Speakers stressed that the only path to security and stability in the region passes through ending the occupation and enabling the Palestinian people to live freely and safely in their independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.

The resistance's weapons are the property of the Palestinian people and a means to achieve their goals, foremost among them ending the occupation and establishing an independent state.

The journey to earn a living turned into a bloody tragedy for the young Palestinian man Yousri Abu Qubaita and his companions, after they were subjected to a violent chase by the occupation army and groups of settlers in an open area south of the West Bank. The incident, which occurred on Wednesday evening in an empty area south of Hebron city, ended with the overturning of driver Abu Qubaita's vehicle and his martyrdom, while eight other workers were injured by occupation bullets and varying bruises.

Eyewitnesses and close relatives of the martyr recounted that the workers used to cross that area to reach their workplaces inside the Green Line, but this time they were surprised by an ambush set by occupation soldiers and settlers who began firing and chasing the vehicles. Diaa Fanash, a friend of the martyr, explained that the bad weather conditions prompted them to try to return, but the settlers' and army's bullets caught them, causing their vehicle to get stuck in a valley and overturn on Yousri as he tried to secure the escape of his companions.

In the family home in Yatta, an atmosphere of sadness and farewell prevailed, where the martyr's father confirmed that his son was striving to provide for his young daughter's daily sustenance amidst the lack of job opportunities in the West Bank. The father pointed out that the risk his son took was a direct result of the economic blockade policy imposed by the occupation authorities on Palestinian workers for many months.

This incident comes in the context of an ongoing Israeli escalation since the start of the aggression on Gaza in October 2023, where the occupation authorities prevent tens of thousands of workers from returning to their jobs. This forced prevention has pushed many to venture through rugged bypass routes, only to find themselves in direct confrontation with live ammunition and systematic abuse by both occupation forces and settlers.

Suffering does not stop at the pursuit in the mountains but extends to workers who succeed in reaching their workplaces, where they are subjected to brutal raid campaigns. Raed Essam, a young man from Salfit, conveyed a harsh testimony about being severely beaten with batons and iron chains by the occupation police in the city of Lod, along with 40 other workers, before being tied up and detained for long hours in humiliating conditions.

Raed described the journey to work as a 'journey of humiliation,' starting with climbing the apartheid wall via ladders placed by brokers for exorbitant sums of money reaching 2000 shekels. He added that workers are forced to pass through water culverts and muddy lands under threat of arms, on a journey that could end with a soldier's bullet at any moment, all to secure their families' future.

For his part, Shaher Saad, Secretary-General of the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions, described the targeting of workers as a 'full-fledged crime' aimed at fighting Palestinians in their sole source of livelihood. Saad affirmed that the occupation deliberately pursues workers and shoots at them daily, documenting the injury of thousands and the arrest of hundreds since the tightening of military measures at crossings and the wall.

Union statistics indicate that the number of Palestinian workers inside Israel was about 240,000 before October 2023, while currently about 70,000 are forced to risk entering without permits. This bitter reality has led to the martyrdom of nearly 68 workers and the injury of about 5,000 others by occupation bullets in recent months, in the complete absence of social protection funds.

Economically, Saad revealed that preventing workers from reaching their workplaces for more than 30 months has caused enormous losses estimated at about 27 billion dollars. This huge loss not only affects families but also negatively impacts the overall Palestinian economy, with the monthly loss for the labor sector alone estimated at about 1.35 billion shekels.

Observers and unionists believe that Israel uses 'impoverishment policy' as a political tool to pressure Palestinian society and push young people towards considering emigration. This policy aligns with annexation and expansion plans in the West Bank, where livelihoods are being squeezed to force residents to leave their lands under the weight of need, poverty, and security pursuit.

Regarding the permit system, Israel imposes strict restrictions including 'security checks' and biometric cards, in addition to conditions related to age and social status. This system, updated in 2020 through electronic platforms, primarily aims to tighten absolute security control over the movement of workers and turn them into hostages of political and military decisions.

Data from the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics shows that the construction sector attracts the largest proportion of these workers, followed by the agricultural and industrial sectors. Most of these workers come from rural areas and refugee camps in the West Bank, which are the areas most affected by closure policies and checkpoints that cut off Palestinian cities.

The continued targeting of Palestinian workers with bullets and abuse reflects the occupation's mentality that does not differentiate between a civilian seeking work and any other military target. The stories of Yousri, Raed, and thousands of other workers remain a living testament to the sacrifices Palestinians make to stay on their land and provide a decent life for their children under an occupation that does not stop killing.

At the conclusion of the funeral, human rights and union organizations demanded the necessity of providing international protection for Palestinian workers and stopping the crimes of the occupation and settlers against them. Mourners in Yatta stressed that the blood of martyr Yousri Abu Qubaita will remain a curse haunting the killers, affirming that a livelihood stained with blood is the title of the difficult stage the Palestinian people are living through.

My son is an ordinary young man seeking to earn a living for himself and his family, and the difficult circumstances and lack of job opportunities in the West Bank pushed him to take risks in search of work.

The U.S. Department of Defense is considering a strategic option to redirect shipments of weapons and ammunition, originally intended to support Ukrainian forces, towards the Middle East. These moves come amid reports indicating a severe depletion in U.S. stockpiles of vital ammunition due to the ongoing military escalation with Iran. Informed sources stated that this shift reflects increasing pressure on the American supply chain to balance needs across multiple battlefronts.

The list of weapons slated for transfer includes advanced interceptor missiles designated for air defense systems, which were previously purchased as part of an initiative launched by NATO to support Kyiv. According to press reports, these missiles were part of a program funded by partner nations to enhance Ukraine's defensive capabilities, but the urgent need in the Middle East has prompted military planners in Washington to reconsider distribution priorities.

In a related context, Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, revealed the scale of military operations carried out against Iranian targets, confirming that over 10,000 sites within Iranian territory have been targeted. Cooper explained that these intensive strikes fall within a clear strategy aimed at undermining Tehran's ability to expand its military influence beyond its regional borders. These extensive operations have consumed massive quantities of interceptor missiles and precision munitions.

For his part, a Pentagon spokesperson emphasized the department's commitment to providing all combat requirements for U.S. forces and their allies to ensure superiority in the field and achieve desired victories. Despite these new directions, NATO officials affirmed that the flow of military equipment to Ukraine continues through existing funding programs. Officials noted that Kyiv's 'Priority Requirements List' program has attracted billions of dollars in investments to ensure continued support.

These developments raise questions about the ability of American defense industries to meet the increasing demand on two active fronts simultaneously. While Washington tries to maintain the pace of military support for Ukraine in its confrontation with Russia, it finds itself compelled to bolster its arsenal in the Middle East to counter escalating Iranian threats. The coming period is expected to witness further international contributions to compensate for shortages in strategic stockpiles and ensure the stability of military supply chains.

We will ensure that U.S. forces and the forces of our allies and partners are provided with what they need to fight and achieve victory.

Israeli occupation forces escalated their field violations in the Gaza Strip, where three citizens were martyred and others sustained various injuries, including children, as a result of a series of raids targeting the central and southern areas on Wednesday. These developments come amidst the fragility of the ceasefire agreement in effect since last October, which has witnessed repeated violations by the occupation army, leading to hundreds of casualties.

In the city of Deir al-Balah in the central Strip, local sources reported that occupation warplanes launched a violent raid targeting the 'Sit Amira' camp in the southern part of the city. The attack resulted in the martyrdom of 22-year-old young man Abdul Rahman Qanbour, in addition to the injury of seven other citizens who were transferred to nearby hospitals for necessary treatment.

Concurrently, an Israeli drone targeted a group of citizens near the Al-Sawarah cemetery in Nuseirat camp, leading to the immediate martyrdom of two individuals. Medical sources at Al-Awda Hospital confirmed the arrival of the martyrs' bodies, noting that direct targeting of civilians has become almost a daily occurrence despite existing understandings.

For its part, the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza issued a new statistical report documenting the victims of Israeli violations during the past 24 hours, confirming the rise in the number of martyrs from violations since last October to 689. The statement clarified that the total number of injured as a result of these aggressions reached 1860, placing the health system under continuous pressure amidst a shortage of capabilities.

Regarding the overall toll since the start of the genocide war in October 2023, the ministry revealed that the number of martyrs exceeded 77,000, while the number of injured surpassed 171,000. These alarming figures coincide with international reports indicating massive destruction affecting 90% of vital facilities in the Strip, with UN estimates suggesting that reconstruction requires a huge budget of up to 70 billion dollars.

The toll of victims from Israeli violations of the ceasefire agreement has risen to 689 martyrs and 1860 injured since last October.

The British newspaper The Guardian issued a warning cry in its latest editorial, calling on the international community to take urgent action to prevent the head of the occupation government, Benjamin Netanyahu, from repeating the series of crimes he committed in the Gaza Strip within Lebanese territory. The newspaper pointed out that the international focus on the conflict with Iran has led to the neglect of the escalating humanitarian catastrophe in Lebanon, where air raids have claimed the lives of about 1,100 people and caused the displacement of a fifth of the population.

The newspaper explained that the military operations, which began under the slogan of 'precision strikes,' quickly turned into a widespread aggression, especially after the statements of Israeli War Minister Israel Katz, in which he revealed new occupation intentions. The occupation aims to impose a so-called 'buffer zone' extending to the Litani River, 30 kilometers deep into Lebanese territory, a measure the newspaper described as illegal and a blatant violation of Lebanese sovereignty.

The editorial linked the extremist tendencies in the Israeli government to what is happening on the ground, where ministers like Bezalel Smotrich openly call for the annexation of Gaza, while the military establishment seeks to apply the same policy in the north. The newspaper stated that the International Court of Justice had settled the legal debate by confirming that the right to self-defense cannot be used as a pretext for occupying territories or committing crimes of forced displacement.

Political circles in Tel Aviv believe that the current situation represents an opportunity to eliminate Hezbollah given its state of attrition and the assassination of its senior leaders in September 2024. However, the newspaper noted that historical experiences have proven the failure of this approach, as Hamas endured despite the destruction of Gaza, and Hezbollah itself was born out of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, which lasted until 2000, meaning that a new occupation would strengthen its popular base.

In the context of diplomatic moves, the Lebanese government took steps that the newspaper described as an attempt to curb external influence, including expelling the Iranian ambassador, but the Lebanese state's ability to enforce disarmament remains very limited. The editorial asserts that Netanyahu, who is facing corruption charges domestically, finds in the continuation of the conflict the only way to restore his faltering political influence and maintain his far-right coalition.

The newspaper quoted human rights and field sources as saying that the occupation army has already begun implementing a scorched-earth policy, with Katz threatening to destroy Lebanese border homes and villages just as Israeli forces did in Rafah and Beit Hanoun. The scenes coming from Lebanon are consistent with the tragedy of Gaza, in terms of forcing civilians to flee en masse and targeting vital infrastructure, including bridges and water and sewage networks.

Lebanese health sector officials accused the occupation authorities of deliberately targeting medical facilities and ambulances to disrupt the emergency response system. In this regard, Human Rights Watch documented the occupation army's use of internationally prohibited white phosphorus shells in populated areas, raising concerns about the systematic commission of war crimes away from effective international oversight.

Internationally, The Guardian criticized the American stance, noting that the Trump administration may not show genuine interest in mediating to end the war in Lebanon, but may instead merely request the protection of certain communities, which the newspaper considered a veiled recipe for ethnic cleansing. Amidst the decline of the French role, which is seeking a way out of the crisis, the occupation government appears to feel complete immunity from any real international prosecution or pressure.

The editorial stressed that international inaction in taking deterrent measures against Israel for its atrocities in Gaza is what gave Netanyahu the green light to expand the killing. Since the last ceasefire announcement, the occupation army has continued to kill hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza, at a time when the humanitarian crisis and famine continue to plague the besieged Strip's residents without any fundamental change in international policies towards the occupation.

The newspaper concluded by calling on Israel's Western allies, especially the United Kingdom, to exert real and effective pressure, including halting arms supplies and imposing diplomatic sanctions. It warned that continuing the policy of 'silent complicity' would lead to a bleak future for Lebanon and would make the international community a partner in crimes committed in cold blood under the guise of defending security.

The current scene in southern Lebanon, according to the newspaper, brings back the worst chapters of the Arab-Israeli conflict, where the language of dialogue is replaced by the language of total destruction and displacement. The ball is now in the court of the major powers to prove the extent of their commitment to international law, or to continue granting the occupation an exception that allows it to violate all humanitarian conventions without fear of punishment.

The widespread inaction in taking effective measures against Israel for its atrocities in Gaza has encouraged the Netanyahu government and its supporters to proceed in Lebanon.

Dr. Ibrahim Nueirat

Palestine today is going through a critical phase as a result of the accumulation of internal divisions and the impact of the ongoing occupation, which has made addressing the effects of the past an urgent national necessity. The division between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip was not merely political disagreements between factions, but its impact extended to the entire Palestinian people. Citizens were affected in their daily lives, whether in terms of individual and social rights, or in employment opportunities, education, and basic services, and the level of trust in national institutions declined. Moreover, the entire Palestinian cause was affected, as the division weakened unified national representation and reduced the Palestinian community's ability to confront internal and external challenges, including Israeli policies, creating a double barrier to national unity and effective international action. In this context, it is clear that the Palestinian people are the real victims of division and political and social accumulations, not one party of the factions, which makes transitional justice a comprehensive national necessity to restore national unity and trust between society and the state.

Theoretical Framework: Transitional Justice

Lessons can be learned from transitional justice experiences implemented by other countries. In Morocco, the Equity and Reconciliation Commission successfully achieved a balance between uncovering the truth, redressing harm, and reforming institutions, without resorting to widespread judicial trials, which enhanced political stability and symbolic justice for victims. As for South Africa, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's experience demonstrated the importance of the principle of “amnesty for truth” to overcome the legacy of apartheid and build a cohesive society based on reconciliation and mutual recognition. Tunisia's experience showed the necessity of a clear legal and institutional framework to address past violations, while Rwanda focused on community justice and local reconciliation after the genocide, benefiting from community traditions to ensure the rebuilding of the social fabric. These models confirm that the balance between acknowledging wrongdoing, redressing harm, reforming institutions, and collective reconciliation is a key factor in building sustainable national unity, and these lessons can be adapted to the specificity of the Palestinian reality to enhance their positive impact.

Specificity of the Palestinian Case: Obstacles to Implementing Transitional Justice

The Palestinian case differs from traditional models of transitional justice, given the complexity of its political structure and the continuation of external conflict, which poses complex challenges to any path of national reconciliation. While transitional justice experiences in other countries were associated with the “post-conflict” or “post-authoritarian” phase, Palestine still lives in a dual reality that combines internal division and ongoing occupation, making the application of this model more complex.

One of these obstacles is the continued Israeli occupation, which limits the Palestinian political system's ability to exercise full sovereignty, restricts the work of institutions, and directly affects any efforts to reform or rebuild them. The occupation also objectively benefits from the state of division, which creates an unstable environment that hinders the implementation of a comprehensive national path for reconciliation and justice.

Secondly, the Palestinian arena suffers from a duality of political and institutional legitimacy between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, where power is contested between major political forces, which weakens the possibility of agreeing on a unified framework for transitional justice, and raises questions about the body authorized to manage and oversee this path.

Thirdly, the absence of a unified national narrative about the events of the division stands out, as narratives differ between political parties, and even within society itself, which complicates the process of uncovering the truth and building a shared collective memory. In light of this disparity, transitional justice mechanisms may turn into a new arena for conflict instead of being a tool to overcome it.

Fourthly, the weakness of trust between political actors constitutes a fundamental obstacle, as different parties fear that the transitional justice path may be used to settle political scores or redistribute influence, which reduces the willingness to make real concessions or acknowledge mistakes.

Fifthly, regional and international interventions play an influential role in complicating the scene, as some Palestinian parties are linked to different regional axes, which may affect their positions on reconciliation and make national decisions vulnerable to external tug-of-war.

Sixthly, economic fragility and reliance on external aid are added to this, which may limit the ability of the authority and institutions to implement effective and sustainable harm redress programs or institutional reform.

Finally, the weakness of the legal and institutional structure stands out as an additional obstacle, as judicial and administrative institutions suffer from the effects of the division, which weakens their ability to play a pivotal role in enforcing justice and ensuring the non-repetition of violations.

Based on this, the application of transitional justice in Palestine requires a realistic and flexible approach that takes these challenges into account, and is based on gradual implementation, building trust between parties, and separating the path of internal reconciliation from external complexities as much as possible. This also calls for an active role for civil society in creating a common space for dialogue, thereby contributing to creating the necessary political and social environment for the success of this path.

Potential for Adaptation and Inspiration from the Moroccan Experience

Despite these challenges, the possibility of benefiting from comparative experiences remains by adapting them to the Palestinian reality.

Palestinian national reconciliation presents itself as a fundamental entry point for overcoming political and institutional division, and rebuilding the national project on inclusive foundations. In light of the failure of traditional reconciliation attempts based on power-sharing or temporary agreements, the option of transitional justice emerges as an alternative framework capable of addressing the roots of the crisis, not just its manifestations.

The Moroccan experience, represented by the Equity and Reconciliation Commission, gains special importance in this context, as it is an Arab model that succeeded in balancing the requirements of justice and stability through a comprehensive approach to addressing the past of violations. The Moroccan experience was based on fundamental pillars that can be considered a reference for any reconciliation path, the most important of which are: official recognition of violations, uncovering the truth, redressing harm, and institutional reform. The goal of these mechanisms was not merely to settle the past, but to rebuild the relationship between the state and society on the foundations of trust and citizenship, which is a transformative dimension that can be benefited from in the context of the Palestinian situation, despite the difference in political and historical conditions.

Palestinian reconciliation faces fundamental challenges, most notably the absence of a unified national narrative about the events of the division, especially in light of the conflict between Fatah and Hamas, where narratives are numerous and sometimes contradictory, which hinders the building of a shared collective memory. Here, the role of the truth-finding mechanism, as implemented by the Equity and Reconciliation Commission, emerges, not only in documenting violations, but in creating a public space for discussion and recognition, which contributes to dismantling the remnants of the past and paving the way for reconciliation based on transparency and clarity.

Palestinian Proposal (Applied Model)

Lessons from the Moroccan Experience and Potential for Palestinian Adaptation

The approach of redressing harm is a pivotal element that can be drawn upon in Palestine, especially given the human suffering resulting from internal division, both at the individual and collective levels. The Moroccan experience has shown that compensation is not limited to the material dimension, but includes symbolic and developmental dimensions that enhance victims' sense of fairness. This dimension can be adapted in Palestine through compensation and integration programs targeting those affected by the division, thereby contributing to strengthening trust between political actors and civil society.

Institutional reform emerges as another essential lesson, as true reconciliation cannot be discussed without restructuring the structures that contributed to or fueled violations. In the Palestinian context, this requires reforming political and security institutions on inclusive national foundations, away from partisan division, to ensure their neutrality and effectiveness in serving the national project.

However, it should be noted that drawing inspiration from the Moroccan experience does not mean a literal transfer of its tools, but rather requires adapting them within a Palestinian framework that takes into account the specificities of the context, including the nature of the conflict, the structure of political actors, and the impact of external factors, such as the ongoing occupation. Success in this path primarily depends on a genuine political will among Palestinian parties that goes beyond competition for power towards a strategic partnership based on national unity. The Moroccan experience embodied a genuine political will to turn the page on the past and open horizons for reform, which is a necessary element for any successful Palestinian model.

The integration of Palestinian civil society is also a fundamental element, similar to the widespread participation of human rights actors in the Moroccan experience, as reconciliation cannot remain merely an agreement between political elites, but must transform into a comprehensive societal project that rebuilds trust and promotes a culture of tolerance.

Based on this, drawing inspiration from the experience of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission represents a strategic option that can contribute to overcoming the Palestinian division, provided it is adopted within a flexible approach based on adaptation and creativity, not on literal imitation. What is required is to build an authentic Palestinian experience that benefits from comparative lessons and responds to the requirements of the political and social reality, thereby paving the way for rethinking the path of reconciliation as a strategic project for rebuilding the state and society on the foundations of justice, fairness, and national unity, and enhancing the ability to confront internal and external challenges.

Palestinian transitional justice emerges as a vital national path that allows all political parties to acknowledge their mistakes and learn from past experiences, and to transform past mistakes into a basis for building an inclusive political and social future. What is required is for the factions to take responsibility for acknowledging wrongdoing, not only at the individual level, but at the level of institutions and society as a whole, to ensure the non-repetition of violations and excesses, and to create an environment in which political and social differences can be managed within the bounds of law and institutions, away from violence or exclusion. Palestinian transitional justice acquires an additional strategic dimension, as it represents a tool to thwart the occupation's attempts to exploit division and weaken national cohesion, and it also represents a response to a widespread popular demand, pressuring the factions to deal positively with the national reconciliation path. Returning to the people through elections alone is not enough to address divisions or restore trust between parties, and if it is not based on comprehensive national reconciliation, it will fail to achieve the desired change. However, if this proposal is agreed upon and seriously implemented, elections become an effective step, based on unity, accountability, and transparency, and establish a stable and sustainable democratic path.

Detailed Proposal for Palestinian Transitional Justice consists of a set of integrated measures:

Building Political Consensus: Through a comprehensive national agreement between all parties to address the past and acknowledge mistakes, with oversight by an independent body representing civil society and national forces to ensure the neutrality of the path, and the involvement of all factions in drafting the roadmap for reconciliation. Here, political challenges can be addressed by developing flexible scenarios to confront resistance, such as establishing initial bilateral and factional dialogues between the most conservative parties to ensure their participation, then expanding the scope of consensus to include everyone, with guarantees that the path will not be used to settle political scores.

Establishing a Palestinian Truth and Equity Commission: An independent body comprising judicial, human rights, and community figures, tasked with documenting violations and listening to victims from all over Palestine, and preparing a comprehensive report that builds a collective national memory reflecting the recognition that the entire Palestinian people are the victims, and ensuring the acknowledgment of wrongdoing at the individual and collective levels, with transparent dissemination of its work results to promote collective recognition. Indicators can be developed to measure the commission's success, such as: number of beneficiaries, their satisfaction with the process, number of initiatives taken based on the commission's recommendations.

A National Program for Redressing Harm: Includes providing material, social, and psychological compensation to all those affected by the division, both individually and collectively, and reintegrating those affected into national institutions and jobs, in addition to rehabilitation and training programs, with official recognition of those affected to restore their dignity and enhance their sense of justice.

A Flexible Approach to Accountability: Adopting the principle of “acknowledgment for mitigation,” with a focus on moral and political responsibility, and avoiding widespread judicial trials that may hinder national reconciliation, to ensure that acknowledging wrongdoing becomes part of collective learning and not a tool for division. To emphasize the balance between justice and reconciliation, a framework can be established that clarifies that the path integrates symbolic justice, acknowledgment of harm, and limited legal responsibility, thereby preventing the repetition of violations without politicizing justice.

Reforming and Unifying Institutions: Includes reforming judicial, administrative, and security agencies to ensure transparency and justice, strengthening judicial independence and professionalism in administration, and establishing clear controls to prevent the repetition of violations.

Involving Society in Reconciliation: By supporting local and community reconciliation initiatives, and involving civil society and local frameworks in managing national dialogue, to promote a culture of acknowledgment, reconciliation, and community participation, ensuring that the path includes all affected segments of society, including youth, women, and marginalized groups. This can be enhanced through continuous media and community communication mechanisms, such as open dialogue programs, online forums, and interactive media campaigns that allow citizens to participate in formulating solutions.

Managing the Occupation File in Parallel: By systematically documenting Israeli violations through legal and international channels, while separating this file from the internal reconciliation path to ensure that efforts are focused on addressing internal divisions and national reconciliation.

Integrating Memory into Education and Media: By including concepts of transitional justice, acknowledgment of mistakes, and reconciliation in curricula, and producing media programs aimed at promoting a culture of acknowledgment, accountability, and tolerance among all components of society, which contributes to educating new generations about the value of reconciliation and national unity.

Monitoring and Implementation Mechanisms: To ensure the continuity of the path and prevent deviation, including monitoring the implementation of the recommendations of the Truth and Equity Commission, independent mechanisms for evaluating progress, and ensuring the separation between political and judicial authority. Interim evaluation indicators can be added to periodically measure the progress and effectiveness of the path.

Time Flexibility and Gradual Implementation: With a clear timeline for each stage of reconciliation, allowing for periodic evaluation and adjustment based on results on the ground.

Practical Vision for Implementing Palestinian Transitional Justice

In light of the preceding analysis of challenges and the Palestinian proposal, a practical vision for implementing Palestinian transitional justice can be developed, based on gradualism and flexibility, and aimed at transforming theoretical principles into applicable steps on the ground, through an integrated phased path that includes:

Creating a Political and Social Environment and Building Trust: The path begins by creating a political and social environment through confidence-building measures between parties, such as launching informal dialogues mediated by independent figures, taking reciprocal steps to reduce tension, and stopping inflammatory media campaigns, thereby creating a suitable climate for initiating the process.

Launching the Path of Truth and Acknowledgment: Moving to the stage of launching the path of truth and acknowledgment by forming an independent preparatory framework that gradually collects testimonies and encourages voluntary acknowledgment within guarantees that prevent political exploitation, thereby contributing to building a shared national narrative.

Activating Harm Redress Programs: Activating harm redress programs by establishing mechanisms for material and moral compensation, providing psychological and social support to those affected, and reintegrating them into society and institutions, thereby enhancing the sense of fairness and rebuilding social trust.

Institutional Reform and Ensuring Non-Repetition: In a later stage, the focus will be on institutional reform through restructuring security and administrative agencies and strengthening judicial independence, thereby ensuring the non-repetition of violations in the future.

Role of Civil Society (Cross-Cutting Element): Throughout all these stages, civil society plays an active role in mediation, monitoring implementation, and promoting a culture of dialogue and reconciliation, thereby transforming this path from a political agreement into a comprehensive societal process.

Relative Separation of Paths: This vision is based on the principle of relative separation between the path of internal reconciliation and the complexities of the conflict with the occupation, allowing for focus on addressing internal division without disruption, while continuing to document external violations through legal and international channels.

Expected Outcomes and Recommendations

This path is expected to have a multi-dimensional impact; politically, by strengthening national unity, reducing division, and increasing the legitimacy of institutions; socially, by restoring trust among citizens, enhancing civic participation, and spreading a culture of reconciliation and tolerance throughout society; legally and institutionally, by developing the justice system, strengthening judicial independence, and improving the performance of security and administrative agencies; internationally, by enhancing Palestine's image as a society striving for good governance and respect for human rights, and attracting technical and human rights support; and in the long term, by building a strong and stable rule of law, reducing the likelihood of internal conflicts, and enabling Palestinian society to work unitedly towards an inclusive political and social future that ensures everyone's participation without exclusion.

This Palestinian model of transitional justice represents a path for political acknowledgment of mistakes and learning from them by all factions, placing differences within the bounds of law and institutions, and addressing the harm that has affected the entire Palestinian people and the national cause as a whole. It also provides a solid foundation that makes any future elections meaningful and effective, because it ensures that political competition will be based on unity, accountability, and transparency, not on division or exploitation of past divisions. Through this path, painful experiences are transformed into a basis for building an inclusive future, where political differences are managed constructively, and differences become a means of dialogue, not a tool for conflict or division, so that Palestinian society can regain its unity and strength, and launch its national project cohesively and sustainably, benefiting from the lessons of international models such as Morocco in acknowledging the past, redressing harm, and reforming institutions as a basis for any true national reconciliation.

Dozens of settlers stormed the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood in Silwan, south of Al-Aqsa Mosque, carrying out a widespread seizure operation that simultaneously affected 13 residential apartments. This operation took place under tight military protection from the occupation forces, which imposed a security cordon to secure the transfer of properties and hand over homes to the settlers.

This escalatory step comes as part of a systematic policy aimed at emptying Palestinian neighborhoods surrounding the Old City of their original inhabitants. Settlement associations, supported by occupation authorities, seek to change the demographic map through biased legal tools and brutal field force that imposes forced displacement.

Human rights and field sources documented occupation soldiers raiding the targeted homes and delivering immediate eviction notices to their residents within a few hours. Teams from the Israeli Execution and Enforcement Department were seen emptying the contents of the residential apartments and throwing them into the open, in preparation for replacing the landowners with settlers.

Jerusalemite Raafat Basbous recounted painful details of the moment his home and his father's home were stormed, where they were given only 24 hours to leave the place they had lived in for decades. Basbous affirmed that his family has resided in this neighborhood since before the occupation of Jerusalem in 1967, specifically for 63 years, considering what is happening an extension of his ancestors' Nakba.

In a harsh human scene, elderly Yousef Basbous expressed his heartbreak at losing his home, which he built 'stone by stone' since 1963. He pointed out that the occupation authorities prevent the rightful owners from entering their homes while opening the doors wide for settlers, emphasizing that this is the second time he has been displaced after the 1948 Nakba.

Eviction operations also affected 11 residential apartments belonging to the Rajabi family, with settlement associations claiming ownership of the land for Jews of Yemeni origin decades ago. Immediately after the families were removed, settlers raised Israeli flags over the rooftops of the buildings in a provocative move reflecting the extent of control.

With this new escalation, the number of apartments seized in the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood in the last four days has risen to 15 residential apartments. This frantic campaign has led to the displacement of about 80 Palestinians, including children, women, and the elderly, who are now homeless under difficult weather and political conditions.

These developments sparked a wave of widespread anger on social media platforms, where activists circulated videos documenting the cries of women and the suffering of children during their expulsion. Observers described what is happening as 'open ethnic cleansing' carried out in cold blood and in plain sight of a silent international community.

Jerusalemite activists warned that displacement operations in Silwan are no longer just individual incidents or legal disputes, but rather an accelerating path to ending the Palestinian presence. They pointed out that the occupation exploits discriminatory laws to legitimize the theft of properties and transform the area around Al-Aqsa Mosque into interconnected settlement outposts.

For its part, the human rights center 'B'Tselem' issued serious warnings about the danger of widespread displacement threatening more than 2,200 Palestinians in the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood alone. The center clarified that hundreds of children face an unknown future amid the occupation's insistence on implementing eviction decisions in favor of settlers and extremist associations.

The danger does not stop at Batan al-Hawa but extends to the adjacent Al-Bustan neighborhood, where about 1,550 people face the risk of their homes being demolished or evacuated. The occupation municipality plans to establish the so-called 'King's Garden' tourist park on the ruins of these historic homes, as part of a comprehensive Judaization project.

Field statistics indicate that the Batan al-Hawa neighborhood has lost about 15 families since the start of the aggression on Gaza on October 7, 2023. Among the families forcibly displaced are the Shahada, Ghaith, Awda, and Shuwaiki families, joining a long list of victims of continuous settlement expansion for years.

Local sources confirmed that the occupation authorities have carried out the demolition of 35 homes in the Silwan area by February 2026, with dozens of other orders pending execution. This acceleration in demolition and seizure operations reflects an Israeli desire to resolve the demographic conflict in occupied Jerusalem as quickly as possible.

Despite the pain and displacement, the residents of Silwan emphasize their right to return to their homes, asserting that the policy of uprooting people from their roots will not succeed. The cries and living testimonies of Jerusalemites remain a historical document exposing the falsehood of the occupation's legal claims and affirming the city's Arab and Islamic identity.

Indeed, the eye sheds tears and the heart grieves for our home and the home of our ancestors. We will leave under threat, but we will surely return.

Local sources reported that a number of Palestinian citizens were injured early Thursday morning, following an attack by settlers in the Safah Tayasir area, northeast of Tubas. The injured were transferred to nearby hospitals for necessary treatment, amidst the recurrence of these attacks, which have targeted the same area intensively recently.

In the context of field settlement expansion, groups of settlers set up tents this morning on lands in the village of Ammarin, northwest of Nablus. This step comes as part of attempts to impose a new settlement reality in the area, as settlers stormed the village under security protection and deployed their equipment on private citizens' lands.

The tent-setting operations were not limited to Nablus but extended to include the Khalayel al-Loz area southeast of Bethlehem, in addition to another tent in the Ayoun area in the southern part of Tubas. Sources stated that this latter area is inhabited by Palestinian families who were forcibly displaced from the northern Jordan Valley due to previous attacks.

Regarding injuries in occupied Jerusalem, ambulance crews confirmed the transfer of 5 injured people to the hospital yesterday, Wednesday, as a result of being severely beaten by settlers in the town of Mikhmas. These attacks occurred specifically in the Al-Mukabira area on the outskirts of the town, causing varying injuries and bruises to citizens.

In Hebron Governorate, early Wednesday witnessed an attack targeting economic facilities, where settlers set fire to a bulldozer and work equipment inside a quarry located in the southern area of the city. These attacks are part of targeting the livelihoods of Palestinians and destroying their private property to intimidate them and push them to leave their lands.

Official data issued by the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission indicates that last February witnessed an unprecedented escalation, with more than 511 attacks carried out in various governorates of the West Bank. The commission also recorded the martyrdom of 7 Palestinians by settler bullets since the end of last month until the beginning of this week.

Since October 7, 2023, the death toll from attacks by the occupation army and settlers in the West Bank has reached about 1134 martyrs, while approximately 11,700 citizens have sustained varying injuries. These figures show the extent of violence against Palestinian civilians in various villages, towns, and cities.

Regarding arrest campaigns, reports indicate that the occupation forces have arrested nearly 22,000 Palestinians since the beginning of the recent escalation last October. These arrests are accompanied by widespread destruction of homes and facilities, exacerbating the humanitarian and economic conditions of the population in the occupied territories.

Policies of forced displacement and home demolition continue as essential tools in settlement expansion, with Bedouin and agricultural communities being directly targeted. This plan aims to empty the land of its original owners in favor of building and expanding illegal settlements that devour vast areas of the West Bank.

Settlers carried out 511 attacks in the West Bank last February, leading to an increase in the number of casualties and field violations.

Gaza City witnessed a tragic incident today, Thursday, resulting in varying injuries to three displaced people, following the collapse of a wall of a building that had been previously subjected to Israeli shelling. Field sources clarified that the dilapidated wall could not withstand the strong winds and heavy rains accompanying the current low-pressure system, leading to its collapse on the displaced people who were sheltering next to it. The injured were immediately transferred to the hospital to receive the necessary medical care.

In the central part of the Strip, specifically in Deir al-Balah city, local sources reported the submersion of hundreds of tents housing thousands of displaced families, after accumulated rainwater turned the displacement areas into pools of mud. Water leaked into temporary shelters, causing damage to blankets, clothes, and essential supplies, amid a complete lack of sewage networks and infrastructure capable of accommodating these quantities of rain.

Displaced families in the western areas of Gaza City face extremely harsh conditions, as the dilapidated tents are unable to provide even minimal protection from the bitter cold and strong winds. These deteriorating weather conditions have increased the suffering of citizens who have lost their homes and are now facing the risk of death not only due to military operations but also as a result of difficult environmental and climatic conditions and a lack of shelter and heating materials.

For their part, civil defense specialists and engineers issued urgent warnings about the danger of staying near facilities and buildings at risk of collapse, emphasizing that the saturation of cracked walls with rainwater increases the likelihood of their sudden collapse. The specialists called on the displaced to exercise the utmost caution and to stay away from rubble and buildings that have been previously hit by airstrikes, to preserve their lives amid the continued low-pressure system.

It is worth noting that the Gaza Strip has been experiencing an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe since the outbreak of the war in October 2023, with statistics indicating that about 1.9 million Palestinians are now displaced and lack safe shelter. This wave of bad weather reveals the extent of the massive destruction that has affected residential areas and places the international community before its responsibilities towards hundreds of thousands of families living in tents that do not meet the minimum standards of human safety.

Continued impact of the low-pressure system may lead to further collapses in damaged buildings and double the risks threatening the lives of displaced people.

Hebrew media sources, quoting officials in Tel Aviv, reported the assassination of the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy, Ali Reza Tangsiri, during an attack in the coastal area of Bandar Abbas. Tangsiri is considered one of Iran's most prominent military leaders, having been responsible for strategic and sensitive files, most notably the threat to close the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation.

The reports circulating in the Hebrew media did not specify the exact timing of the attack targeting the Iranian commander, amidst conflicting news about the party responsible for the operation. While some analyses suggest that the US military is targeting Iranian coastal areas, other sources confirm that Israel is leading qualitative assassination operations deep inside Iran.

In a related context, diplomatic sources revealed that Israel has backed down from plans to target high-ranking Iranian political figures, including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. This retreat came after pressure exerted by Pakistan on the US administration, warning that the elimination of these leaders would lead to the absence of any party with whom to negotiate to end the conflict.

American press reports confirmed that the removal of Araghchi and Ghalibaf's names from the Israeli targeting list is a temporary measure that may last only a few days. This step, according to US officials, aims to test the possibility of opening political communication channels leading to a comprehensive de-escalation in the region, away from the language of direct military escalation.

For his part, US President Donald Trump expressed his explicit desire to end military operations against Iran as soon as possible. Informed sources reported that Trump set a timeline of four to six weeks to complete this mission, indicating that the current attacks should enter their final stages according to the pre-established plan.

The US President believes that the continued aggression against Iran represents a political drain that distracts the administration from pressing domestic issues. Irregular migration files and preparations for the upcoming midterm elections are at the top of the White House's priorities, pushing Trump to press for a resolution of the Iranian file through a mix of military force and diplomacy.

On the diplomatic front, Pakistan emerged as a pivotal player in mediating between Tehran and Washington, alongside supporting roles from Egypt and Turkey. Islamabad maintains direct and effective communication channels with both parties, making it the most prominent candidate to host any potential peace talks aimed at stopping the bleeding of war in the Middle East.

As part of these efforts, Washington sent a 15-point proposal to the Iranian leadership via the Pakistani mediator, including conditions for ending the confrontation. The US administration claimed that the Iranian side is showing a desire to reach an agreement that would end the state of isolation and successive military strikes that the country's infrastructure and leadership have been subjected to.

Despite these moves, Tehran maintained a cautious stance, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stating that his country is carefully studying the US proposal but has not yet decided to enter into direct negotiations. Araghchi denied any current dialogue with Washington, stressing that Iran does not intend to make concessions under the weight of continuous military threats.

Sources indicate that predicting Trump's final decisions remains difficult, especially given the overlap between political statements and field operations. While the White House talks about a desire for peace, airstrikes continue to target strategic locations, leaving the region facing open scenarios between comprehensive de-escalation or a major explosion.

Regional and international capitals are cautiously monitoring the outcomes of these developments, especially with the approaching deadline set by Trump to end the war. Fears are growing that any miscalculation in the field, such as the confirmation of Tangsiri's assassination, could lead to a widespread Iranian reaction that could derail all current Pakistani and American mediation efforts.

The assassination file remains the primary driver of the escalation level, as Tehran considers targeting IRGC leaders a red line that requires a response. If the death of the naval commander is confirmed, this could push the IRGC to carry out retaliatory operations in international waterways, which would complicate Trump's mission to end the war in the next six weeks.

The Israelis had the coordinates of Araghchi and Ghalibaf and wanted to eliminate them, but Washington asked them to back down to ensure there was a party they could talk to.

By Gershon Baskin

Over many years of engaging in unofficial dialogue with Palestinians, Israelis, and regional actors, I have come to a simple but critical conclusion: Before starting a war, responsible leaders must ask themselves how it will end. And the answer must ultimately be political and achieved through diplomacy.Wars are easy to begin. They are much harder to end.History repeatedly demonstrates that military campaigns launched without a clear political endgame rarely produce stability. Instead, they leave destruction, trauma, and unresolved grievances that eventually force the same political conversations that could have taken place before the fighting began.Today’s confrontation between Israel and Iran, together with the ongoing conflict with Hezbollah, raises exactly this question. Military operations can achieve tactical successes. Missiles can be intercepted. Infrastructure can be destroyed. Commanders can be eliminated.But none of these actions answer the most important strategic question: What political reality will exist after the guns fall silent? If the political situation after the war looks exactly like it did before the war, or worse, the region will have paid an enormous price for very little strategic gain.Wars sometimes create moments of strategic transformation. When the dust settles, they can open political doors that previously seemed locked. The challenge for Israel, the United States, and the Arab world today is to recognize that such a moment may now be emerging.The confrontation with Iran and its network of regional proxies has accelerated a significant shift in the Middle East. A growing number of Arab states increasingly see their security interests aligning with Israel’s in confronting Iran’s regional ambitions, missile capabilities, and the destabilizing influence of armed proxy organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and other militias.Countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan, Egypt, and others are confronting the same strategic reality: The region cannot achieve long-term stability while Iran projects power through armed non-state actors and destabilizing military capabilities.This shared concern has already led to unprecedented levels of quiet security coordination and intelligence cooperation. It has also strengthened the logic behind an emerging regional security architecture linking Israel, moderate Arab states, and the US in a cooperative defense framework.But regional defense cooperation cannot be built on military logic alone. For Arab governments, normalization with Israel and participation in a regional security framework is not only a strategic calculation; it is also a political issue connected to the Palestinian question. Arab leaders understand that their ability to deepen relations with Israel in a visible and durable way depends on credible progress toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is the reality Israeli leaders must confront.For more than a decade, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently acted in ways that weaken the possibility of a two-state solution. Settlement expansion, the political marginalization of moderate Palestinian leadership, and the absence of any serious diplomatic initiative have all contributed to the erosion of the political horizon necessary for peace. In doing so, Israel has undermined not only prospects for resolving the conflict but also its own ability to build broader strategic partnerships in the region.The wars with Iran and Hezbollah have nonetheless created a potential strategic opening for Israel that could fundamentally transform its place in the Middle East. Israel could move from a position of partial regional isolation to full integration within a cooperative regional security and economic system. But that transformation will not occur without addressing the Palestinian issue.For many Israelis today, the idea of a Palestinian state seems remote or unrealistic. Years of violence, failed negotiations, and deep mistrust have eroded confidence in the peace process. The trauma of the October 7 attacks and the devastating war that followed in Gaza have further hardened public attitudes.Yet the absence of a political solution does not produce stability. The alternative to a negotiated political framework is not the disappearance of the conflict. It is its permanent continuation. As long as millions of Palestinians live without political sovereignty and national self-determination, the conflict will continue to generate cycles of violence, radicalization, and instability that ultimately undermine Israel’s long-term security and international standing.The two-state solution remains the only framework capable of reconciling Israel’s legitimate need for security and national self-determination with the Palestinians’ equally legitimate aspiration for independence and dignity.Even in the midst of the current war, voices from the region are warning about the dangers of allowing military escalation to replace political strategy. In a recent joint statement, Iranian and Israeli peace activists condemned the war and warned that escalating military confrontation will deepen insecurity across the region. They pointed to the ideological hostility of the Iranian regime toward Israel and the US as a major driver of confrontation, while also criticizing the decision by Israeli and American leaders to resort to war without exhausting diplomatic options or clearly defining political objectives.Their message was simple: Wars justified by claims of imminent threats often deepen instability rather than resolve it, and political transformation within Iran cannot be imposed from outside but must come from Iranian society itself. Their call was for an immediate end to hostilities and a renewed commitment to diplomacy, international law, and political solutions. The US and key Arab states possess considerable leverage in shaping Israel’s strategic choices. Security guarantees, regional defense integration, normalization agreements, and large-scale economic cooperation initiatives could dramatically reshape Israel’s regional position. Israel could become a central pillar of a new Middle Eastern security and economic architecture.But those incentives will not materialize without a credible political commitment regarding the future of Palestine. This is something Israeli political parties in the opposition need to pay attention to: Israel is not required to reach an immediate final-status agreement. It does require establishing a clear political horizon: a credible, internationally supported pathway toward the emergence of a demilitarized Palestinian state living peacefully alongside Israel.Such a framework would require strong security arrangements, phased implementation, and international guarantees. It would also demand serious reforms within Palestinian political institutions and a determined effort to ensure that armed groups committed to violence do not control Palestinian governance.None of this will be easy. But the alternative is far worse.The Middle East has seen too many wars begin without serious thinking about the political order that must follow them. Lebanon’s civil war, the Iraq War, the Syrian catastrophe, and repeated Gaza wars all demonstrate the same painful lesson: Military victories without political frameworks rarely produce lasting stability.Israel’s confrontation with Iran and Hezbollah should not follow that pattern. Instead, it could become the catalyst for a broader regional transformation – one that includes collective defense cooperation, expanded normalization between Israel and Arab states, and a genuine political process leading toward Israeli-Palestinian peace.During the decades that I have sat in quiet rooms with Palestinians, Israelis, and others in the region discussing how this conflict might finally end, I have seen that even bitter enemies often understand the outlines of the solution long before their leaders are ready to act.The parameters of Israeli-Palestinian peace have been known for many years. The real question has never been what the solution looks like. The question has always been whether leaders have the courage to move toward it. Wars should never begin without a vision of the peace that must follow them.That vision is long overdue.

Gershon Baskin

The war in IranPresident Donald Trump’s sudden turnaround from his threat to obliterate Iran’s energy infrastructure if the Strait of Hormuz was not opened within 48 hours should not have surprised anyone. Trump is the most unpredictable leader in the world. His self-image as a dominant dealmaker is closely tied to power and money.When the war in Iran began to impact oil prices and shake Wall Street, it became clear that escalation had limits. Trump can always justify stepping back by presenting himself as the ultimate negotiator. In his worldview, deals are the product of strength. “Peace through strength” is not just a slogan, it is his modus operandi.Is Israel pleased that the United States is negotiating an end to the war with Iran? Clearly not. But when Trump signals his intentions, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has little room to resist. Even under conditions of Israeli military dominance, US diplomatic channels remain open – as evidenced by the Iranian aircraft that left for Pakistan to continue negotiations without being intercepted.We must ask some fundamental questions. Was this a war of necessity? I believe not. Is Iran a real threat to Israel and the region? Absolutely. Does the Iranian regime endanger its own people? I believe it does. Would the world benefit from a democratic Iran? Without doubt. But will this war produce regime change? Highly unlikely.Can the war remove Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium? Possibly, but only if the United States sustains pressure. Can military force alone guarantee safe passage of oil through the Strait of Hormuz? No. That requires Iranian consent. Ultimately, Trump will decide when enough has been achieved and declare victory.For Israel, a “victory” might mean removing enriched uranium and securing limits on Iran’s missile program. Yet the regime will likely remain, possibly even more radicalized. That would represent a strategic failure mostly for Israel, but also for the United States, and the Iranian people.Is there a diplomatic end? There was certainly a diplomatic path to prevent the war. Ending it diplomatically is more complex but still essential. Trump alone may be able to secure that outcome. What influenced his shift? Oil markets, Wall Street, and key regional actors: Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar – whose influence also ended the war in Gaza.The war with HezbollahThere is a clear diplomatic path to ending the war with Hezbollah, but Israel’s government has so far resisted it. That path is embodied in the French proposal, which is gradually evolving into what could become a joint US-French initiative – perhaps ultimately branded as a Trump proposal.The framework begins with an immediate ceasefire, recognizing that no meaningful political process can proceed under active hostilities. France argues, correctly, that Hezbollah cannot be disarmed while Lebanon is under attack. The proposal envisions a phased process: negotiations between Israel and Lebanon, potentially hosted in Paris or the United States, leading to a non-aggression understanding and a robust version of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 from 2006.A key component is the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces in southern Lebanon, replacing Hezbollah’s military presence. This would be supported by an international effort, led by the United States, to strengthen Lebanon’s government under President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, both seen as anti-Hezbollah figures. The plan also assumes a full Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.Over a limited time period, Hezbollah would be expected to relinquish its weapons as Lebanese state institutions grow stronger, mainly the Lebanese army. The proposal opens the real possibility of eventual normalization between Israel and Lebanon, after a military-security pact has been agreed to.This is a pivotal test for Trump. If he adopts this framework, he could compel Israel to end its military operations and accept a negotiated border arrangement. Yet the obstacles are significant: Israeli resistance, Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm, and the limited capacity of the Lebanese state.Still, the proposal offers a structured alternative to endless war. It reinforces a simple truth: Lasting stability can only be achieved through political agreement.Netanyahu and Trump’s peacemakingNetanyahu’s government remains convinced that military force can achieve decisive victories against Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. This belief has shaped Israel’s strategy across all fronts. Yet in none of these cases has the enemy surrendered. Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas have all absorbed heavy blows while continuing to fight back.There are also voices in the region urging Trump not to settle for partial outcomes. Anwar Gargash, senior adviser to the UAE president, recently argued that the war must end not with another ceasefire but with the containment of Iran’s nuclear program, missile capabilities, and regional aggression. If Trump could achieve all of this, he would gain broad regional support, perhaps with the exception of Netanyahu. But Netanyahu ultimately cannot defy Trump’s decisions.GazaDespite appearances, Gaza remains central to US strategy. Washington intends to move forward with the second phase of its peace plan, including disarmament arrangements for Hamas. A proposal for Hamas’s disarmament was recently presented to Hamas leaders in Cairo by High Commissioner for Gaza Nickolay Mladenov. While US representatives did not meet Hamas directly, they engaged with mediators from Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey.But time is running out. Gaza cannot wait. Hamas has filled the vacuum of governance despite widespread public discontent in Gaza. The external Hamas leadership is becoming increasingly irrelevant, while decision-making power is shifting to leaders inside Gaza. The United States must engage directly with those leaders on the ground. From what I understand, they are open to this dialogue.If conditions in Gaza do not improve soon, Israel may seize the opportunity to resume full-scale military operations. Should the wars in Iran and Lebanon come to an end under US pressure, Israel may receive a green light from Trump to return to Gaza with overwhelming force.The limits of military powerAcross all three arenas – Iran, Lebanon, and Gaza – the limits of military power are becoming increasingly clear. Force can weaken enemies, but it does not eliminate them nor resolve the underlying conflicts. Political solutions remain the only viable path to long-term stability.Trump’s approach, rooted in power and transactional dealmaking, may yet produce diplomatic outcomes. But those outcomes will depend on whether he is willing to translate military leverage into sustainable political agreements. The alternative is clear: continued cycles of war with no decisive end. Trump wants to be the peacemaker president, and he has the power to translate military force into effective diplomacy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zHw6Bnh3kk

Dr. Ali Al-Jarbawi, Professor of Political Science at Birzeit University, believes that the current war is a struggle over the future of the international system, in which major powers interact, each in its own way. He says that the war will continue and that the high ceiling for mutual conditions is usually at the beginning of any negotiation process, as each party claims to be the victorious party.

https://youtu.be/1zHw6Bnh3kk

Alex Younger, the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service, made striking statements in which he affirmed that Iran now holds the 'upper hand' in direct military confrontation with the United States and Israel. Younger indicated that the American administration significantly underestimated the challenge posed by Tehran, leading to Washington losing the initiative on the ground and politically over the past two weeks in favor of the Iranian regime.

The former intelligence official considered that the regime in Tehran showed an unexpected ability to withstand and surpass Western estimates, explaining that the Iranian leadership has made smart strategic decisions since last summer. These decisions included distributing military capabilities and delegating broad field powers to use weapons, which gave Iranian forces superior flexibility in confronting the intensive air campaigns that targeted them.

In an analysis of the nature of the conflict, Younger believed that US President Donald Trump's statements contributed to strengthening the combat doctrine among Iranians, as they now view the confrontation as an existential and civilizational war that cannot be divided. In contrast, the United States appears to be fighting a 'war of choice,' a divergence in motives that gives Tehran longer breath and greater ability to continue fighting compared to its adversaries.

Younger touched upon the 'horizontal escalation' strategy adopted by Tehran, by expanding the targeting circle to include vital interests in Gulf countries hosting American military bases. He stated that these moves aim to exert indirect pressure on Washington and internationalize the conflict, especially with Tehran's early realization of the importance of the energy weapon in influencing international decision-making.

The British expert stressed that Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of global oil supplies flow, gave Tehran a clear advantage in the ongoing war. Younger described the Iranian performance as highly skilled in managing 'weak cards' and transforming them into strategic strengths that confused the calculations of military planners in Tel Aviv and Washington.

This analytical reading comes amidst the continuation of military operations led by the United States and the Israeli occupation against Iranian targets since late February, which resulted in the assassination of prominent leading figures. Despite these strikes, Tehran continues to respond by targeting American interests in the region, while maintaining its naval and political influence in vital waterways.

On the domestic political front in Washington, sources quoted members of the Senate as sharply criticizing the Trump administration for the absence of a clear vision for the post-military operations period. Lawmakers affirmed that the war's objectives remain vague, especially since intelligence reports indicated that Tehran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon before the outbreak of the confrontation, which weakens the justifications given for starting the fighting.

In conclusion of his assessment, Younger linked the current confusion to a previous intelligence failure represented by the events of October 7, 2023, emphasizing that Benjamin Netanyahu's government made a grave mistake by ignoring prior warnings. He explained that the intelligence mindset that underestimated the capabilities of the Palestinian resistance is the same one that today leads to flawed assessments regarding Iranian capabilities and the cohesion of its internal front.

The reality is that the United States underestimated the task, and I believe it has lost the initiative to Iran for about two weeks.