International press sources reported that Iran, in the eyes of external powers, has been stripped of a large part of its traditional military capabilities, yet it still maintains internal control despite losing a number of its most prominent political and military leaders. The rapid developments raise fundamental questions about the nature of 'the day after' if US President Donald Trump declares a final victory in his operation, which he dubbed 'Epic Rage'.

Through this operation, Trump seeks to achieve a historic accomplishment that changes the balance of power in the Middle East, something his predecessors did not dare to contemplate. The US President has set broad goals ranging from destroying Iran's military infrastructure to inciting the Iranian people to seize power and radically change the existing regime.

Reports indicate that a prolonged war faces internal obstacles in Washington, as military operations enjoy only limited support from the American public, not exceeding 30%. The rapid rise in energy prices and declining jobs are also pressuring the US administration as the midterm elections approach next November.

On the diplomatic front, the anticipated meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping emerges as an additional pressure factor to end military operations. China, which has strategic and energy ties with Tehran, strongly criticized the American attack, which may push Washington to declare victory before the end of March to facilitate the bilateral summit.

The first scenario, promoted by some circles in Washington, is the spontaneous collapse of the regime under the pressure of external bombing and internal protests. In this case, the Revolutionary Guard and Basij may abandon fighting, paving the way for the return of the monarchy, represented by Reza Pahlavi, to manage a transitional phase leading to general elections.

The second scenario appears darker, as the regime may be shaken without completely falling, opening the door to widespread chaos. With internal opposition and escalating demands from ethnic minorities such as Arabs, Kurds, and Baloch for self-rule, the country may slide into a slow civil war amid the spread of weapons.

Mojtaba Khamenei, who was appointed Supreme Leader to succeed his father, emerges as a figure representing the hardline wing of the Iranian regime. However, questions are raised about his health status and leadership ability, especially with his disappearance from public view since his father's death last February and the loss of several family members in air attacks.

The third scenario proposes the 'Venezuelan model' as a possible solution, where the regime remains in place but strikes a secret deal with the United States. Under this agreement, Tehran permanently abandons its nuclear program and reduces its missile arsenal in exchange for a gradual lifting of the suffocating economic sanctions that are debilitating the state.

This diplomatic path requires a strong figure within the regime capable of negotiating with the West, and Ali Larijani's name is being circulated as a potential candidate for this role. However, the major obstacle remains the extent to which the hardline wing associated with the Revolutionary Guard would accept such fundamental concessions that touch the core of the regime's ideology.

Sources indicate a divergence of views between Washington and Tel Aviv on the ultimate goals of the war. While the US administration wishes to end military operations quickly to avoid economic repercussions, Israel seeks to exhaust the Iranian regime as much as possible to ensure it does not rise again.

Declaring victory in this war may be unilateral, unless Tehran explicitly admits defeat, which is unlikely given the regime's political culture. This ambiguity may keep the region in a state of constant tension even after direct air strikes on vital targets cease.

Analyses confirm that Iran will emerge from this confrontation weaker regionally, especially after the damage it sustained in previous confrontations in 2025. This external weakness may push the regime to tighten its internal security grip, making the regime an increasing threat to the Iranian people themselves.

Amid infrastructure destruction, Iran will face enormous challenges in rebuilding itself economically and politically in the post-war phase. Any future leadership will have to deal with a heavy legacy of destruction and debt, in addition to a society suffering from deep divisions between loyalists and opposition.

In conclusion, Iran's future remains suspended between Trump's ambitions to change the region's political map and a complex internal reality that refuses to fully comply with external dictates. The 'day after' that everyone talks about may not be as rosy as some imagine, but rather the beginning of a new chapter of conflicts in the heart of the Middle East.

Declaring victory, if it happens, will most likely be a unilateral declaration by the United States and perhaps Israel, unless Tehran admits defeat.

The southern Dahiyeh of the Lebanese capital, Beirut, witnessed a new wave of violent aerial raids early this Friday morning, as Israeli aircraft targeted at least two locations. Thick plumes of smoke rose into the sky over the area, causing panic among local residents who have been facing continuous escalation for days.

In a significant field development, an Israeli drone targeted a civilian vehicle in the Jnah area of Beirut, causing it to completely catch fire. Firefighting and civil defense teams rushed to the scene to extinguish the blaze, amid reports of injuries resulting from this direct targeting in the heart of the capital.

The shelling did not stop at the capital's borders but extended to towns and villages deep in southern Lebanon, where media sources reported that the towns of Doueir, Ansar, and Abba were subjected to intense aerial raids. These attacks resulted in a number of injuries, while ambulance teams continued evacuation and search operations under the rubble.

Diplomatically, the State of Qatar expressed its strong condemnation of these aggressions, describing them as a blatant violation of the rules of international humanitarian law. The Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirmed in an official statement that what is happening represents a clear breach of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which aims to maintain stability in the region.

Doha called on the international community to take immediate action and fulfill its responsibilities to compel the Israeli occupation authorities to stop their repeated attacks. It also emphasized its firm and supportive stance for Lebanon's unity and territorial integrity, affirming its support for all efforts aimed at enhancing Lebanese security and stability.

On the other hand, media reports revealed a sharp verbal altercation between the heads of local authorities in northern Israel and the commander of the Galilee Division in the army, Yuval Gaz. This tension came against the backdrop of intense rocket barrages launched by Hezbollah, which caused a complete paralysis in the northern settlements.

Local officials accused the army leadership of misleading them and providing incorrect security assessments about the nature of imminent threats. They expressed their dissatisfaction with the long duration of the sirens, which lasted for ten continuous minutes, reflecting the extent of the failure to contain the recent rocket attacks.

Informed sources indicated that the Northern Command had reassured the mayors hours before the attack that there were no intentions of escalation from Hezbollah's side. However, the reality on the ground was completely different, as the area was subjected to heavy shelling with projectiles and rockets throughout the night.

Thousands of settlers in the north were forced to remain in fortified shelters for long hours due to the continuous shelling, which increased the intensity of popular and official anger against the army. The heads of authorities considered that what happened proves the falsity of military claims that promoted the absence of a direct Hezbollah threat from the border.

Press sources quoted senior officials in the Northern Command as saying that the army's current strategy focuses on the defensive aspect in confronting Lebanon. These officials added that the Israeli strategic focus remains directed towards Iran as the main arena for confrontation, not the Lebanese front.

Despite these military justifications, settlement leaders believe that the army failed to protect them from anti-tank missiles and Hezbollah's offensive capabilities. They affirmed in their confrontation with the military commander that the promises made to them throughout the past year regarding border security were nothing but illusions that dissipated with the first real test.

Mutual military operations continue on the Lebanese-Palestinian border in the absence of any prospect for de-escalation, with the scope of targeting expanding to include vital areas in Beirut. Observers fear that these developments could lead the region to slide into a comprehensive confrontation that goes beyond the currently applicable rules of engagement.

What happened adds to the lie you promoted for a whole year, which is that there is no Hezbollah near the border.

The last ten days of the blessed month of Ramadan this year have arrived at Al-Aqsa Mosque with a scene completely different from what the city of Jerusalem has known for decades, as the courtyards, which used to be bustling with tens of thousands of worshippers in seclusion, appeared empty and desolate. The occupation authorities closed the doors to worshippers, preventing them from reaching the mosque or even entering the Old City, in a measure considered the first of its kind since the occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967.

Under these strict restrictions, prayers inside the mosque were limited to only five people: the Imam, the muezzin, the prayer leader, the pulpit guard, and the mosque director, while the voices of the worshippers who used to fill the corridors and courtyards were absent. Field sources reported that a tone of sadness prevailed in the performance of the imams due to the absence of worshippers who were accustomed to answering the call to prayer in this sacred space.

One of the imams of Al-Aqsa Mosque, who has been leading prayers for over four decades, described the current situation as 'forced absence' of worshippers, noting that the mosque used to be crowded with visitors from Jerusalem, the Palestinian interior, and from outside the country as well. The imam expressed his deep sorrow at seeing the first of the two Qiblas empty at a time when the mosque was supposed to be filled with remembrance and seclusion around the clock.

Since the outbreak of the recent military tensions in the region on February 28, prayers in Al-Aqsa have been limited to internal loudspeakers only, depriving the residents of the Old City from hearing the call to prayer and the prayers. The Dome of the Rock prayer hall also remained completely closed, which increased the mosque's isolation and stripped it of its usual spiritual and social symbolism during Ramadan.

Jerusalemites express deep anguish over this deprivation, as imams are forced to pray in mosques near their homes to compensate for their forced absence from the mihrab of Al-Aqsa. These imams face urgent and painful questions from worshippers about when the mosque will reopen, questions that remain without clear answers amidst the ongoing 'state of emergency' imposed by the occupation.

For his part, Jerusalemite doctor Majd Al-Hadmi, who has volunteered as an imam and muezzin for 15 years, considered what is happening to be 'unreasonable deprivation' and a clear politicization of security measures. Al-Hadmi affirmed that the pretexts put forward by the occupation regarding the absence of shelters are illogical, given the robustness of the historical prayer halls, which are more fortified than modern shelters, indicating other objectives behind the emptying.

Al-Hadmi stressed that Al-Aqsa represents a unique social and spiritual space where Palestinians from different regions meet, which the occupation seeks to undermine by cutting off the lifeline to the city. He believes that the absence of Arab and Islamic identity from Jerusalem in these blessed days is a carefully planned matter to impose a new reality that ends the collective Palestinian presence in the mosque.

Historical data indicate that the closure of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the prevention of Friday prayers there has occurred only five times since 1967, the last of which was in recent days coinciding with the ongoing military attack. This recent recurrence reflects an acceleration in the use of comprehensive closure as a punitive and political tool against Jerusalemites and Islamic holy sites.

The Governorate of Jerusalem warned that these measures fall within a systematic plan to impose direct occupation control over the mosque's administration and marginalize the role of the Islamic Endowments Department. The Governorate clarified that the occupation is exploiting the current circumstances to change the existing legal and historical status quo that recognizes Islamic custodianship over the holy sites.

Omar Al-Rajoub, Director of the Media Department in the Governorate, affirmed that the closure aims to consolidate Israeli influence and prepare the ground for future Judaization schemes in Al-Haram Al-Sharif. He considered that preventing worshippers from accessing the courtyards of Al-Aqsa during the holiest times represents a blatant violation of internationally guaranteed religious rights and a challenge to the international community.

The recent Israeli restrictions included a complete ban on seclusion (I'tikaf), stopping the entry of necessities for worshippers and staff, in addition to activating armed military patrols inside the courtyards. The measures also affected 'Dar Al-Hadith Al-Sharif' by preventing scientific circles, in a clear attempt to dry up cultural and religious sources within Al-Aqsa Mosque.

In contrast to the restrictions on Muslims, local sources observed an increase in the times settlers stormed the mosque, and the issuance of hundreds of eviction orders against those stationed there, activists, and endowment employees. This duality in treatment reveals a premeditated intention to enable Jewish presence in the mosque at the expense of authentic Islamic rights, exploiting the declared state of war.

Jerusalemite activities believe that the occupation is sending political messages that complete control over Al-Aqsa has become possible, and that it has the ability to impose a new reality without deterrence. These messages are considered a dangerous signal to the local and international communities about the future of the holy city and its holy sites, which face an unprecedented existential threat under the guise of 'security'.

In conclusion, Al-Aqsa Mosque remains captive in these blessed nights to military measures that have turned its courtyards into a barracks, while Palestinians await an Eid whose joy may not be complete until they return to the embrace of their mosque. Questions remain about the extent of popular and diplomatic resilience to restore the status quo and protect Jerusalem's identity from ongoing distortion and Judaization.

Al-Aqsa is sad and there is no one in its courtyards; I never imagined that I would see the first of the two Qiblas empty of its inhabitants on the holiest nights of the year.

The American administration announced that it has not yet begun implementing military escort operations for oil tankers crossing the Strait of Hormuz, despite escalating tensions in the region. This step comes amid warnings of the danger of the maritime passage, which has become a potential confrontation arena, as Washington fears its ships will be subjected to direct attacks by drones or cruise missiles launched from nearby Iranian coasts.

US President Donald Trump had earlier proposed using naval force to secure navigation and reopen the strait, with the aim of avoiding a global energy crisis resulting from rising oil prices. However, US military movements so far have been limited to carrying out limited strikes targeting ships accused of planting naval mines near vital passages in the region.

For his part, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified that there is no specific timetable for the start of naval escort missions, noting that the US Navy seeks to build an international coalition for this purpose. Bessent affirmed that operations will begin as soon as full military readiness and the ability to confront direct threats surrounding commercial vessels are available.

Military experts believe that the biggest challenge lies in the complex geography of the region, where Iranian missile launch platforms are located very close to shipping lanes. The distance at some critical points is less than 4 miles, meaning that missiles and drones can reach their targets within a few minutes, making interception difficult.

The Strait of Hormuz is the world's most important energy artery, connecting the Arabian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea, with about 20% of total global oil consumption passing through it. The de facto closure of the strait by the Iranian side about two weeks ago led to severe disruptions in global markets and a significant increase in shipping and insurance costs.

The past few days have witnessed a field escalation, as six oil tankers were attacked in Gulf waters, some of which were directly attributed to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. These attacks come as part of the pressure strategy adopted by Tehran in response to ongoing US and Israeli military operations against targets associated with it in the region.

In a related context, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard affirmed that it would not allow any oil shipments to pass through the strait unless external attacks ceased, a position supported by the new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. This Iranian insistence places the US administration before difficult choices between direct military escalation or accepting the continuation of the naval blockade.

Former military commanders at the Pentagon indicate that the narrowness of the waterway, which is no more than 21 miles wide at its narrowest points, makes ships easy targets for naval mines and guided missiles. They explained that the mere feeling of danger prompted many international shipping companies to avoid passing through the strait even before actual attacks occurred, which further complicated the crisis.

Proposed US plans to secure navigation include providing continuous air support and surveillance patrols of launch sites on the Iranian coast for proactive intervention when necessary. Despite White House attempts to reassure global markets that the situation is under control, the field reality indicates that the mission is fraught with risks that could lead to a wider conflict.

The mission is costly, complex, and not guaranteed to succeed, as drone and missile attacks can cause significant damage even to a single ship.

The French Army General Staff announced that six of its soldiers were injured in a drone attack targeting a military site in the Erbil region of Iraqi Kurdistan. Military sources clarified that the injured soldiers were carrying out joint training missions with Iraqi forces as part of counter-terrorism efforts, and they were urgently transferred to nearby medical facilities for necessary care.

According to field data provided by the Governor of Erbil, the aerial attack was carried out by two suicide drones, targeting a military base located in the 'Mahla Qahra' area. This base is approximately 40 kilometers southwest of the regional capital and is considered one of the sites where international forces operating in Iraq conduct advisory and training activities.

This field escalation comes shortly after a similar incident targeted an Italian military base located within a security complex that includes units of various foreign nationalities in Erbil. Although the previous attack did not result in casualties or human injuries, it raised widespread security concerns among the command of international forces present in the region.

In a swift reaction to the repeated targeting, Italian authorities announced their decision to temporarily withdraw all their military personnel from the targeted base to ensure their safety. These forces, including French and Italian units, have been present in Iraqi Kurdistan since 2014, with their missions focused on providing logistical and training support to local security forces within the international coalition to confront ISIS.

The region is experiencing a state of increasing security tension, as Iraqi Kurdistan has been subjected to a series of similar attacks attributed to armed factions active in the Iraqi arena. These developments coincide with broader regional unrest, placing foreign forces and military facilities in the region under constant threat from drone and missile attacks.

The injured soldiers were participating in counter-terrorism training with Iraqi partners and were immediately transferred to the nearest medical center for treatment.

The new Iranian Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, issued a decisive decree on Thursday to keep the Strait of Hormuz closed to international shipping. This strait is a strategic artery for global oil trade, and the decision immediately led to new jumps in crude prices amid fears of disruption to international supplies.

For its part, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard announced its full commitment to implementing the new leader's orders, affirming its military readiness to enforce the closure and prevent any breaches. This move comes amidst an escalation of direct military confrontation between Tehran on one hand, and Tel Aviv and Washington on the other.

Mojtaba Khamenei appeared in his first official statement, read by an announcer on state television, after being chosen as the general leader to succeed his father, Ali Khamenei. The late leader was assassinated in Israeli-American airstrikes targeting leadership positions in Iran earlier this week.

Official sources revealed that the new leader was personally injured during the attack that led to his father's death, but his health condition is stable. The spokesman for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ismail Baqaei, confirmed that Mojtaba Khamenei is 'fine' despite the injury he sustained, and is carrying out his leadership duties normally.

In the first Israeli reaction, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a clear threat to the new leader during a recent press conference. Netanyahu refused to give any guarantees for the safety of the leaders of what he described as 'the terrorist organization,' referring to the new Iranian leadership, affirming the continuation of military operations.

Mojtaba Khamenei emphasized in his speech the necessity of the unity of the Iranian people in facing the current external challenges. He affirmed that Tehran will not back down from its right to respond to 'the blood of the martyrs,' considering that the issue of revenge is at the top of Iranian policy priorities in the coming phase.

On the regional level, the new leader sent what were described as warning messages to neighboring countries, calling on them to get rid of American influence. Khamenei considered that American military bases in the region are the primary source of instability and attraction for security tensions, denying any hostility towards Arab peoples.

Observers believe that Mojtaba Khamenei's speech reflects a complete adherence to the principles of his late father and an unwillingness to make political concessions. Analysts pointed out that the new leadership seeks to reassure the Iranian interior of the continuity of state institutions and their ability to respond militarily despite the severe blows.

In contrast, American forces continue their operations in the region to disrupt Iranian naval capabilities and try to secure shipping lanes. Sources reported that Washington seeks to remove naval mines and undermine Tehran's ability to control the Strait of Hormuz, despite the field difficulties it faces.

The American arena is witnessing increasing concern about the repercussions of this war on the local economy, especially with the decline in stock markets. Former diplomats believe that President Donald Trump's administration faces pressure to clarify its final strategy in dealing with the unprecedented Iranian escalation.

The current American administration aims, according to political assessments, to push for a change in the Iranian regime's approach to become less hostile. However, the selection of Mojtaba Khamenei, who is described as a hardliner, may complicate Washington's calculations in reaching a political settlement or a quick de-escalation.

Reports indicate that the primary battle is now focused on the maritime domain, where Iran has succeeded in targeting some ships and disrupting supplies. This reality puts the Trump administration before difficult choices between escalating military operations or accepting a new geopolitical reality imposed by Tehran.

Regarding Arab positions, experts believe that Tehran demands these countries take balanced stances and distance themselves from the conflict. The Iranian leadership warns that American interests entrenched in the region may be legitimate targets if attacks on Iranian territory continue.

In conclusion, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz remains prone to further explosion with the Revolutionary Guard's insistence on implementing the comprehensive closure decision. International circles are awaiting the nature of the upcoming Iranian response, and whether the region will slide into a widespread regional war that transcends the limits of current confrontations.

Iran will not refrain from avenging the blood of its martyrs, and this issue will remain among my top priorities.

The Israeli army admitted today, Thursday, to committing a grave tactical and field error during Wednesday night, as it failed to issue prior warnings to residents about a large-scale rocket attack launched by Hezbollah from southern Lebanon. This admission came after a wave of widespread criticism directed at the security agencies following a night of terror experienced by settlers in the northern and central regions.

Official sources quoted the Northern Command of the occupation army as confirming that forces did not inform the public in a timely manner about the detection of unusual movements and deployment of Hezbollah fighters along the border. This shortcoming led to a state of severe confusion, especially with the start of the shelling, which amounted to about 200 rockets targeting various locations.

In the hours leading up to the attack, widespread rumors spread across social media platforms, causing panic among residents that lasted for many hours. Reports indicated that some mayors received initial updates about Hezbollah's preparations, but the absence of an official stance from the army increased the level of anxiety and tension.

Media sources indicated that the Israeli army's silence on Wednesday night was a wrong behavior, as it was necessary to inform the public about the nature of the expected threats. The Hebrew Broadcasting Corporation confirmed that this silence contributed to exacerbating the psychological crisis among settlers who found themselves under heavy fire without clear guidance.

On the ground, sirens sounded in more than 13 different locations within the occupied territories, where radars detected the launch of about 200 rockets from Lebanese territory. Despite the intensity of the shelling, there were no immediate reports of human casualties, but material damage and panic were widespread on the home front.

In a related context, the occupation army continued its aggression against Lebanon, as warplanes carried out a series of violent raids targeting the southern suburb of the capital Beirut. A military statement claimed that these attacks come as part of a response to the recent escalation and an attempt to reduce Hezbollah's missile capabilities targeting Israeli depth.

On the ground, the army announced that forces from the '810 Mountain Brigade' of the 210th Division are operating in strategic points in the Jabal Douf area in southern Lebanon. Military sources claimed that these operations aim to strengthen defensive lines and protect northern residents from any infiltration attempts or short-range missile attacks.

The occupation forces claimed to have found launch platforms and weapons depots belonging to Hezbollah during sweeping operations in the border areas. These seizures included mortar shells and other military equipment, which engineering units completely destroyed on site to ensure they would not be used again.

In the Beqaa region of eastern Lebanon, two Israeli raids targeted a residential building in the village of Qasr Naba, shortly after evacuation orders were issued to residents. Local sources reported that the first missile did not explode in the first raid, prompting warplanes to carry out a second raid to completely destroy the building.

Reports from the Lebanese National News Agency did not indicate any casualties in the Qasr Naba raid, but confirmed extensive material damage to surrounding properties. This shelling comes within the policy of 'pre-warnings' followed by the occupation to justify the destruction of civilian facilities under the pretext of their use by the resistance.

Observers believe that the Israeli army's admission of its mistake reflects the size of the gap between intelligence estimates and the explosive field reality on the northern front. This admission also puts the military leadership in the face of increasing popular pressure demanding better protection and more transparent communication with the public in times of emergency.

The border region has witnessed an unprecedented escalation for months, with both sides exchanging heavy shelling amid international fears of the situation sliding into an all-out war. Hezbollah confirms that its operations come in response to the ongoing Israeli aggression and in support of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip who are subjected to a war of extermination.

In light of these developments, questions are increasing within Israeli society about the effectiveness of ongoing military operations in securing calm for northern residents. Despite intensive raids, Hezbollah is still able to launch massive rocket barrages that reach distant areas and often bypass air defense systems.

In conclusion, the field situation remains prone to further escalation given the occupation's insistence on continuing its air raids and limited ground operations. Last night's events reveal that the Israeli home front still suffers from clear gaps in crisis management and warning of imminent threats.

The Northern Command admitted that the army made a mistake by not informing northern residents in a timely manner about Hezbollah's unusual deployment across the border.

The southern Dahiyeh of Beirut witnessed a new wave of violent airstrikes this Thursday evening, with attacks concentrated on the Al-Amrousiyeh neighborhood and surrounding areas. Field sources reported that the shelling came in the context of a continuous escalation targeting infrastructure and residential areas, leading to widespread destruction in the targeted sites.\n\nFor its part, the spokesperson for the Israeli occupation army claimed that air and ground forces managed to eliminate dozens of Hezbollah elements during the past twenty-four hours. The army claimed in its statement that it succeeded in destroying about 20 missile launchers that were prepared to target Israeli depth, as part of its attempts to reduce the offensive capabilities of the party.\n\nOn the political and military front, the Israeli Broadcasting Corporation revealed moves aimed at strengthening field control in areas of southern Lebanon. Sources indicated that the current plan includes establishing fixed military points and observation posts to ensure the consolidation of the Israeli presence in the areas recently infiltrated.\n\nIntensive security consultations are underway in Israeli decision-making circles to discuss the possibility of expanding the scope of the ground operation to include deeper areas. According to reports, this operation may actually begin next week if operational plans are agreed upon between the military command and the political level.\n\nIn contrast, Israel's Channel 12 quoted a senior military source as saying that there is caution in approving large-scale military operations in Lebanon. The source explained that the current trend is to avoid sliding into an all-out war on the northern front before resolving other regional issues related to the confrontation with Iran.\n\n"The 'Cabinet' mini-ministerial council is scheduled to meet to discuss the details of the next phase of military escalation on the Lebanese border. Ministers will discuss proposals to increase the area of the 'buffer zone' that Israel seeks to impose by force of arms, in response to the continued intensive missile barrages launched by Hezbollah.\n\nIn statements reflecting Israeli intentions, Security Minister Yisrael Katz affirmed that the Lebanese state has lost the ability to control its territories and prevent attacks. Katz stressed that Israel will take control of the border areas itself to ensure the security of northern towns, considering this an urgent security necessity.\n\nField data indicates that the Israeli army has increased the number of its positions inside Lebanese territory to 23 military sites. This figure represents a significant jump compared to only five sites that existed before the start of the recent escalation, confirming the strategy of gradual territorial encroachment in the south.\n\nPolitical observers believe that Lebanon is currently facing a escalating storm that threatens its fragile stability and turns it into a major war zone. Researchers explained that Israeli operations that reached the heart of the capital Beirut reflect a desire to change the rules of engagement and impose a new field reality that goes beyond previous understandings.\n\nSerious concerns arise about the possibility of opening new fronts for ground infiltration through the Western Bekaa region or observation centers in Mount Hermon. Such moves, if they occur, will lead to massive waves of human displacement and exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in a country already suffering from severe economic and social collapses.\n\nIn conclusion, the field situation in Lebanon remains linked to complex regional calculations and continuous military coordination between active parties. With the continued Israeli mobilization, Lebanese and international circles are awaiting the results of the Cabinet meetings that will determine the course of the confrontation in the coming days.\n\nIsrael will control border territories because Lebanon is unable to prevent missile launches from its territory.

Warnings are escalating about the profound economic repercussions of the ongoing conflict in the region, as wars are no longer confined to military confrontations on the ground but have extended to impact the vital arteries of the globalized economy. Experts in shipping and logistics believe that any disruption in the maritime map, specifically in the Arabian Gulf region, will create a shock that transcends regional boundaries to affect every port in the world.

Logistics expert Raphael Ben Ari explained that global monitoring of developments with Iran tends to focus only on security aspects, ignoring a major economic drama unfolding behind the scenes. He pointed out that the Israeli reading of the scene confirms that the current escalation aims to impose a hefty global price, especially with the targeting of energy infrastructure, which is the lifeline of international trade.

The Strait of Hormuz stands out as one of the most dangerous chokepoints in the global economy, with approximately 30% of the world's oil and gas supplies passing through this narrow waterway. Sources confirmed that any actual threat to this passage immediately translates into sharp jumps in energy prices, which was clearly evident in the recent increases, reaching 20% for a barrel of oil.

Fuel prices are the primary driver of maritime transport costs, and therefore, any increase in energy prices quickly reflects on the cost of shipping goods and essential commodities. The issue is not limited to fuel prices but extends to include changing maritime routes and reassessing security risks, making the transport process more complex and costly for global companies.

After a period of relative stability and ships returning to the Suez Canal route, the current escalation has forced shipping companies to once again revert to the alternative route around Africa via the Cape of Good Hope. This alternative route significantly prolongs sea voyages and causes an increase in fuel consumption by up to 30% compared to the shorter route through Suez.

The economic equation resulting from the longer distance and higher fuel prices has led to a massive jump in transport prices, with the cost of transporting a single container from the Far East now increasing by thousands of dollars. Many global shipping lines have begun imposing additional fees under the names 'war surcharges' and 'fuel emergencies' to cope with the increasing financial burdens resulting from security tensions.

The insurance sector is one of the most sensitive elements in this crisis, as global insurance companies are reassessing the risks of sailing in areas classified as war zones. Sources reported that some reinsurance companies have begun to refrain from covering ships in the Gulf region, while other companies have raised insurance premiums tenfold their previous value.

These financial and security pressures have caused widespread disruptions in supply chains, with many shipping companies ceasing to accept transport requests destined for ports in Gulf countries. This halt has led to a backlog of shipments in alternative ports in Asia, such as Singapore, India, and Malaysia, creating a state of confusion in the flow of goods and products across continents.

The global trade system resembles an interconnected network, and any disruption at a vital point like the Arabian Gulf spreads like wildfire throughout the entire supply chain. Hundreds of ships, including giant oil tankers and container ships, are currently facing difficulties in continuing their usual routes, threatening shortages in supply and an increase in prices for the end consumer.

Despite this regional disruption, reports indicate that the Israeli occupation is trying to maintain the continuity of its commercial systems and seaports normally. The Shipping and Ports Authority continues to issue instructions to ensure the flow of goods, while customs, import, and export activities continue in an attempt to avoid complete economic paralysis.

In the air sector, Ben Gurion Airport still receives air cargo flights, with cargo planes belonging to local companies continuing to operate to secure essential needs. However, the allocation of some flights for rescue and evacuation operations has reduced the available space for cargo transport, placing an additional burden on the already strained air transport system.

Analysts believe that the global economy is still at the beginning of a wave of disruption, and that the continuation of the crisis in the Gulf region will inevitably lead to further congestion in global ports. These logistical pressures will ultimately lead to delays in the arrival of vital supplies, which could push global inflation rates to new record levels that are difficult to control.

International trade is by nature a complex and highly sensitive system to geopolitical shocks, and every military escalation is followed by a cascading economic reaction whose end cannot be predicted. Those who observe maritime traffic today realize that the world stands on the cusp of a transitional phase that may reshape global trade routes and impose a new economic reality characterized by high costs and high risks.

In conclusion, the Israeli reading confirms that the ongoing war is no longer a border conflict but has turned into a battle on the energy front and global supply chains. If the threat of closing vital waterways continues, the economic shock will affect every home in the world, placing the international community before the responsibility of confronting these repercussions before it is too late.

The escalation in the Middle East is not just a regional event, but an economic and logistical drama shaking international trade and placing the global energy economy at the heart of the confrontation.

Official American sources reported a double attack targeting the 'Temple Israel' synagogue in West Bloomfield, Michigan. The incident involved a car ramming followed by intense gunfire in the area surrounding the building. FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed that FBI teams immediately began their field work in cooperation with local authorities to control the situation and secure the site.

For its part, the Michigan State Police announced that preliminary investigations are underway to determine the motives behind the attack, which caused panic in the town, noting that all necessary measures are being taken to ensure the safety of residents in the area surrounding the synagogue. The local police chief confirmed in media statements that security forces successfully apprehended the suspect involved in carrying out the operation, without disclosing his identity at this time.

This attack comes in the context of a wave of security disturbances, as it is the second incident of its kind in one day after a separate shooting incident was recorded in the Dominion area of Virginia. Informed sources explained that what increases the seriousness of the Michigan incident is its occurrence at a synagogue that includes a school annex, which amplified fears of injuries among students or civilians present at the location.

Security reports linked these incidents to a series of warnings issued in the past few days regarding the possibility of places of worship in the United States being subjected to attacks described as 'terrorist'. These warnings come amid escalating political and military tensions in the region, especially direct and indirect confrontations between the United States and Israel on one hand, and Iran on the other.

Following these developments, US authorities raised the security alert level to high in major airports and vital facilities across various states, coinciding with arrests of suspects. The past few days have witnessed strict security measures, including an emergency landing of an airplane after a passenger was suspected due to the sound of the Adhan (call to prayer) emanating from his mobile phone, before he was later released after verifying his situation.

In the capital Washington and major cities, police patrols were heavily deployed at intersections and public squares to monitor the situation and protect sensitive facilities from any potential threats. Intelligence agencies are analyzing data related to the recent attacks to determine whether there are organizational links between the perpetrators or if they fall within the framework of lone wolf operations influenced by the general political climate.

A state of anticipation prevails in the American street awaiting the results of the final investigations being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation into the Michigan attack, amid calls for enhanced protection around religious and educational institutions. The relevant authorities continue to review security cameras and eyewitness testimonies at the incident site to provide a complete picture of how the attack occurred and the parties that may be behind inciting it.

FBI agents are on site dealing with an attack involving a car ramming and shooting at a synagogue in West Bloomfield.

March 13, 2026

News Analysis

Washington, D.C-For decades, the United States has anchored the global economic order. Since the end of the Cold War, Washington has presided over a system built on open markets, the primacy of the dollar, and institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. This architecture granted the United States enormous structural advantages: the world’s reserve currency, unrivaled financial power, and the ability to shape global trade and finance.

But history rarely stands still. The world economy has gradually become more multipolar, driven by the rise of new economic centers—most notably China and India—as well as the growing assertiveness of emerging coalitions such as BRICS. What once appeared to be an unassailable American economic hegemony is now facing structural challenges.

Washington’s recent military confrontation with Iran may accelerate that transformation.

The war, initiated under the administration of Donald Trump, was framed by its supporters as a decisive strategic move aimed at weakening Iran’s regional influence and deterring further escalation in the Middle East. Yet wars rarely remain confined to the strategic calculations that launch them. Their economic consequences often ripple across the global system in unpredictable ways.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the energy markets.

Iran sits at the heart of the global energy geography. The country borders the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow maritime passage through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s traded oil flows. Any conflict that threatens shipping through this chokepoint immediately reverberates across the global economy. Since the outbreak of hostilities, oil markets have reacted with heightened volatility, reflecting fears that the conflict could escalate into a broader regional confrontation.

Should tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz be disrupted, energy analysts warn that oil prices could surge dramatically—possibly reaching $200 per barrel. Such a spike would not simply represent another cyclical fluctuation in commodity prices. It would amount to a systemic economic shock.

High oil prices have historically triggered recessions, inflationary spirals, and political instability. The oil crises of the 1970s offer a stark reminder of how energy shocks can reshape global economic dynamics. Today’s world economy, already burdened by inflationary pressures and geopolitical tensions, would be particularly vulnerable.

For the United States, the consequences would be especially complex.

On one hand, America is no longer as dependent on imported oil as it once was, thanks to the shale revolution. On the other hand, the global financial system—and by extension the U.S. economy—remains deeply interconnected with global energy markets. A dramatic surge in oil prices would raise transportation and manufacturing costs, intensify inflationary pressures, and force central banks to tighten monetary policy at a moment when economic growth is already fragile.

But the deeper risk is geopolitical rather than purely economic.

American economic dominance has long rested not only on the size of its economy but also on the stability of the international system it helped construct. The dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency, for example, depends on confidence in the broader U.S.-led financial architecture.

That architecture is increasingly under pressure.

Countries across the Global South have already begun exploring ways to reduce their dependence on the dollar. Bilateral trade agreements denominated in local currencies are expanding, while institutions associated with the BRICS grouping are promoting alternative financial mechanisms. Although these efforts remain limited in scale, they reflect a broader strategic trend: the search for economic autonomy from Western-dominated systems.

A prolonged conflict with Iran—and the economic disruptions it could trigger—may accelerate this shift.

If oil prices surge and global markets become more volatile, many countries will inevitably seek mechanisms that insulate them from geopolitical shocks originating in Washington. Energy-importing nations, particularly in Asia, could deepen financial cooperation with China while expanding regional trade arrangements that bypass dollar settlement.

For China, such developments would represent a strategic opportunity. Beijing has long sought to expand the international role of its currency and strengthen economic networks across Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative have already laid the groundwork for a parallel web of economic relationships that operate partly outside Western financial structures.

In a world shaken by energy shocks and geopolitical fragmentation, those networks could become more attractive.

None of this means that American economic power is about to collapse. The United States still possesses extraordinary structural advantages: the world’s deepest capital markets, unmatched technological innovation, and global corporations that dominate entire sectors—from digital platforms to artificial intelligence. The dollar remains deeply embedded in international finance, and replacing it would require decades rather than years.

Yet economic hegemony is rarely lost in a single dramatic moment. It erodes gradually as the structural conditions that sustained it begin to change.

The war with Iran risks accelerating precisely such a process.

By triggering instability in global energy markets, raising the specter of $200 oil, and deepening geopolitical polarization, the conflict may weaken the very international system that underpins American economic influence. Instead of reinforcing U.S. leadership, the war could push more countries to hedge their bets—diversifying partnerships, currencies, and economic alliances.

The result may not be the sudden end of American power. But it could mark another decisive step toward a world in which the United States is no longer the uncontested economic center of gravity.

In that emerging multipolar order, Washington will remain a leading power—but no longer the one that sets the rules alone.

On October 7, Israel was subjected to a surprise attack that brought the Middle East back into a state of extreme tension. From Tel Aviv's perspective, this attack was not just a fleeting incident, but an extension of Iran's strategy in the region, which practices long-term attrition through its proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. Every movement, every missile, and every threat is seen in Israel as a test of the viability of its deterrence doctrine, where any existential threat is considered a justification for a decisive and swift response. Israel's response went beyond a military operation to become both a symbolic and punitive message, aimed at punishing Iran for supporting its proxies, affirming Israel's continued existence, and declaring that any dream of an existential threat has ended.

This firm response is not random; rather, it stems from an Israeli mindset governed by the instinct for survival. Israeli existence is surrounded by a difficult historical, geographical, and political environment, which the state considers an inherently "repellent" environment, both in terms of direct threats and the hostile regional environment. Therefore, any threat, even if limited, is viewed as a test of the state's survival. Hence the intensity and speed of the Israeli response, as the state treats every threat as an opportunity to establish long-term deterrence, and the instinct for survival makes the response swift and decisive at times, regardless of regional or long-term costs. This partly explains the gap with the United States, which tends to view the conflict through a broader and more conservative strategic lens, while Israel focuses on the immediate and existential threat at the present moment.

In this context, the United States was drawn into Israel's desire for revenge and deterrence, and did not prepare its objectives in advance, nor was it ready for a war of this magnitude, because the primary objective was purely Israeli: to inflict punishment on Iran and leave the subsequent results open to dealing with circumstances at the time. Among Israel's most ambitious and perhaps least logical goals from a traditional strategic perspective was the attempt to create chaos within Iran and stir up stagnant waters. The Iranian regime is very conservative and operates cautiously without exposing itself to direct prosecution, making any external intervention to cause internal unrest extremely difficult. This desire presented Israel with a challenge and a tempting provocation at the same time, because it provides a means to weaken Iran without direct confrontation with its cohesive institutions.

Here, the gap in objectives between Israel and the United States becomes clear. Israel wants swift punishment and a comprehensive deterrent message, while the United States realizes that any attempt to completely change the Iranian regime would require years of ground intervention, making regime change a distant and unrealistic goal at the current stage. Moreover, the American approach to managing the conflict reflects a kind of deliberate chaos rather than precise strategic planning, as messages contradict and military and political orientations change rapidly, leaving allies and markets in a state of constant anticipation. In contrast, Israel expands the scope of its objectives to include Iran's vital energy facilities and missile capabilities, in an attempt to maximize pressure on the regime, while Washington tries to control the pace and restrict its objectives to avoid sliding into an uncalculated widespread war.

Furthermore, Israel's response was not limited to confronting Iran only, but extended to carry clear messages to the rest of the region's countries. From Tel Aviv's perspective, every military operation sends a signal that Israel is capable of protecting itself and deterring any threat, and that any attempt to weaken it or test its capabilities will be met with a decisive and immediate response. These messages also aim to remind allies and adversaries alike that Israel is not only an existing state, but a strategic power that can dictate the rules of the game in the region. The escalation in various locations, whether in Gaza or southern Lebanon, or targeting Iran's missile and energy capabilities, is not viewed in Israel as merely a military operation, but as part of a continuous deterrence strategy to renew regional prestige, and to affirm that any attempt to threaten Israel's existence is a red line that cannot be crossed.

Consequently, the war on Iran has become a collision arena between Israel's deterrence doctrine, the instinct for survival that governs every decision and response, American chaos, and Iran's attrition strategy through its proxies in the region. Every week brings new possibilities of unexpected escalation, diplomatic surprises, or reactions from Iran through its proxies. Israel's most ambitious scenario, which is regime change in Iran or creating internal chaos, could lead to deep regional chaos including state collapse, internal conflicts, and large waves of refugees, while the most likely scenario for the United States, with its awareness of the limitations and consequences, is limited to a partial victory and inflicting punishment, with dealing with the results later according to the prevailing circumstances.

In the end, the war on Iran is not just a military conflict, but a symbolic war of deterrence in which the United States was drawn into Israel's retaliatory goals, with open outcomes thereafter, and also aims to destabilize an internally fortified regime. It is a reminder that Israel remains, and that any existential threat is met with a decisive response, and that regional repercussions and long-term results will be managed according to the available data at the moment, making the conflict complex and full of contradictions from its beginning.

The Lebanese capital, Beirut, and its southern suburb witnessed today, Thursday, a new wave of violent Israeli air raids that targeted residential and vital areas. Field sources reported that the shelling directly targeted a building in the Bashoura neighborhood and another in the densely populated Zqaq al-Blat area, while the southern suburb was subjected to two consecutive raids that caused widespread destruction of properties.

In a remarkable field development, an Israeli drone carried out an attack targeting the courtyard of the Faculty of Science at the Lebanese University on the outskirts of the southern suburb. This raid resulted in the martyrdom of the Dean of the Faculty, Dr. Hussein Bazzi, and his colleague, Professor Dr. Mortada Sorour, in a crime that targeted academic and educational cadres in the country.

As for southern Lebanon, the Israeli war machine continued to target towns and villages, as a drone raided the public road in the town of Ain Ebel, affiliated with the Bint Jbeil district. This strike led to a number of injuries among civilians, while another raid targeted the intersection of the town of Ma'raka in the Tyre district as part of the ongoing escalation policy.

Regarding human casualties, the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health announced a bloody toll as a result of a raid that targeted the town of Arki in the Sidon district in the south of the country. The ministry confirmed in a brief statement the death of 9 martyrs and the injury of 7 others with varying injuries, as ambulance and civil defense teams are working to recover the victims from under the rubble and transport the injured to hospitals.

These developments come amid the expansion of Israeli targeting to include the Lebanese interior and public facilities, amid warnings of the worsening humanitarian situation. Rescue teams continue search operations in the targeted sites in Beirut and the South, at a time when the displacement of residents from areas subjected to systematic shelling is increasing.

Dr. Hussein Bazzi, Dean of the Faculty of Science at the Lebanese University, and Dr. Mortada Sorour, a professor at the faculty, were martyred as a result of an Israeli raid that targeted the faculty's courtyard.

The Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip announced today, Thursday, a slight increase in the number of casualties who were able to reach medical facilities, as hospitals received one martyr and nine injuries in the past few hours. Medical sources clarified that these figures are limited only to evacuated cases, given the ongoing field challenges faced by rescue teams.

The ministry stressed in its field statement that the announced statistics do not represent the true extent of human losses in the Strip, due to the presence of hundreds of victims who are still missing under the rubble of destroyed buildings or lying in rugged roads. It indicated that civil defense and ambulance crews face extreme difficulties in reaching these areas due to continuous targeting or lack of necessary capabilities to recover bodies.

Regarding the statistics recorded since the eleventh of last October, official data revealed the registration of 651 martyrs and 1,741 others injured with varying degrees of wounds. During this period, specialized teams were also able to recover the bodies of 756 victims who fell in earlier times of the aggression, reflecting the scale of the ongoing tragedy in various governorates of the Strip.

As for the cumulative toll since the outbreak of the aggression on October 7, 2023, the Ministry of Health announced that the total number of martyrs has risen to 72,136 martyrs, while the number of wounded and injured reached 171,839 people. These shocking figures confirm the enormous human devastation left by the continuous military operations over many months of intensive bombing.

The humanitarian suffering continues in the Gaza Strip with the deterioration of the health system and the inability to provide necessary care for thousands of injured people who overcrowd medical corridors. Health authorities appeal to the international community for urgent intervention to provide safe corridors for rescue teams to recover the missing and provide emergency medical aid to hospitals operating beyond their capacity.

This statistic does not reflect the reality on the ground due to the large number of victims under the rubble and in the streets, where civil defense teams are unable to reach them.

Washington – Said Arikat – 12/3/2026

In a new step within its policy aimed at "drying up the funding sources of groups it designates as terrorist," the United States announced sanctions on four charitable organizations it said operate as a front for financing the Hamas movement, specifically its military wing known as "Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades," according to a statement issued by the US State Department on Thursday. The US administration states that these organizations use humanitarian work as a cover to collect funds and transfer them to military activities in the Gaza Strip.

According to the official statement, a copy of which was received by Al-Quds newspaper, these measures come within the framework of US efforts to disrupt the funding channels on which the movement relies, and to expose what Washington described as "the exploitation of civil and charitable organizations" in supporting military activities. The US administration believes that these financial networks constitute one of the main pillars that allow Hamas to maintain its organizational and military capabilities inside and outside Gaza.

Washington affirmed that the sanctions target an "illicit financing network" and aim to cut off financial flows that could be used to support the movement's military operations. It also stressed that these measures fall within a broader strategy to combat terrorism financing, including monitoring financial institutions and associations suspected of involvement in transferring funds to armed groups.

According to the statement, "the US administration simultaneously affirms that it does not target humanitarian work per se, but rather seeks to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians" through "reliable and secure" organizations, away from any political or military exploitation. Washington emphasizes that it supports international efforts aimed at improving the humanitarian conditions of Palestinians, in parallel with working towards achieving lasting peace in the region.

These sanctions are based on Executive Order 13224 on combating terrorism, which was issued in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, and grants the US government broad powers to freeze financial assets and impose restrictions on individuals or entities suspected of supporting terrorist activities. The US State Department had previously listed the Hamas movement as a terrorist organization under this executive order on October 31, 2001.

The United States also designates the movement as a "Foreign Terrorist Organization" under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a designation that allows for additional sanctions and makes providing any material support to the movement a crime punishable under US law.

The US Treasury Department states that the new measures come after extensive financial investigations, during which it observed what it considered a recurring pattern of using charitable institutions to collect donations and transfer them to channels linked to Hamas. It adds that the sanctions include freezing any assets that may be subject to US jurisdiction, in addition to prohibiting financial dealings with these entities.

Washington views this step as part of a broader policy aimed at tightening the noose on the movement's financial structure, not only within the Palestinian territories but also through support networks abroad.

This step reflects the continuation of the traditional US approach to dealing with the Hamas movement, which primarily focuses on financial and legal tools to undermine the movement's capabilities. Washington believes that Hamas's financial structure is no less important than its military structure, and that striking funding sources can weaken its ability to endure and organize. However, critics argue that this approach ignores the broader political context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as financial pressure alone has not succeeded over the past decades in ending the movement's influence or reducing its popular presence in the Gaza Strip.

The targeting of charitable organizations always sparks wide debate in humanitarian and human rights circles, because the line between humanitarian work and political work in conflict zones is often fragile. In Gaza, large segments of the population rely on charitable institutions to provide food, healthcare, and education. Therefore, some observers fear that financial restrictions and sanctions could complicate the work of legitimate humanitarian organizations, or reduce the flow of international donations, which could directly affect civilians who are already living in difficult humanitarian conditions.

Politically, these sanctions come in a broader context of regional tensions and repeated military escalation in the region. Successive US administrations have used economic sanctions as a key tool in their Middle East policies, whether towards states or armed groups. However, experience shows that sanctions, despite their ability to weaken some financial networks, are rarely sufficient alone to bring about radical political change. Therefore, some analysts believe that such measures reflect conflict management more than they reflect a comprehensive strategy for resolving it.

Hebrew media sources reported that the occupation's air defense systems faced unprecedented challenges in countering recent Iranian missile attacks. The sources confirmed that 11 missiles equipped with cluster warheads successfully penetrated the defensive shield and reached their targets, causing extensive material damage in various areas.

Military data indicates that this round witnessed a qualitative escalation compared to previous confrontations, as only 3 missiles of this type had previously succeeded in penetrating. Reports clarified that the wide dispersal area of these missiles complicates the processes of inventorying and dealing with the resulting damage in residential areas.

According to estimates, Iran has launched approximately 250 ballistic missiles since the beginning of the current round, with fragmented warhead missiles accounting for nearly half of this number. Despite continuous interception attempts, the record launch rate contributed to a number of submunitions reaching vital centers.

Sources observed one cluster missile hitting five different locations simultaneously, most notably in the Ramat Gan area where the submunitions created deep holes in house courtyards. Technical teams also recorded one submunition penetrating the roof of a fortified bunker, raising questions about the destructive capability of these munitions despite their small size.

Although the weight of a single fragmented submunition ranges from only 2 to 3 kilograms, its destructive impact is described as significant due to the high speed of the fragments. These explosions caused structural damage to old buildings over nine decades old, in addition to destroying private property and cars in the streets.

In a related context, sources confirmed the killing of ten settlers as a result of two conventional ballistic missiles falling on the Tel Aviv and Beit Shemesh areas. Conventional missiles are characterized by carrying warheads weighing hundreds of kilograms of explosives, leading to the complete collapse of buildings in the event of a direct hit.

Technical reports explain the mechanism of Iranian cluster missiles, where the warhead opens at an altitude of up to 7 kilometers above ground level. This upper explosion leads to the dispersal of dozens of small munitions that cover wide areas, mimicking the effect of short-range missile barrages.

In the Gush Dan area, dozens of small craters resulting from the fall of these submunitions were observed, generating huge quantities of deadly fragments. In a remarkable incident in Tel Aviv, the force of the explosion from one of these submunitions completely dislodged a vehicle from its place and threw it a long distance.

Defense experts believe that the Iranian arsenal is increasingly relying on integrating cluster warheads into its long-range missiles directed towards the occupation. This list includes advanced 'Ghadr' and 'Emad' missiles, which possess high maneuverability and the ability to bypass defensive radars.

The danger of the 'Khorramshahr' missile stands out particularly, as reports indicate its ability to carry a warhead containing up to 80 submunitions. This qualitative development places the occupation's home front under a constant threat, making it difficult to predict where its fragments will fall or to limit their widespread destructive effects.

The cluster missile opens at an altitude of approximately 7 kilometers above ground level, causing smaller munitions to scatter and inflict widespread damage.

The 'Financial Times' affirmed in its editorial that US President Donald Trump faces real dilemmas in his attempt to find a way out of the war he has engaged in alongside Israel against Iran. The newspaper indicated that this conflict has put the Middle East in a state of severe turmoil, amidst the absence of a clear vision for the end.

Trump has shown striking contradictions in his statements in recent days, hinting at times at his desire to stop military operations, describing the conflict as 'completely over.' These words immediately reflected on energy markets, as the price of a barrel of oil fell below $90 after touching the $120 ceiling.

However, the calm did not last long. As soon as financial markets closed, the US President returned to adopting an aggressive and hardline rhetoric, asserting that the United States would not back down until achieving a 'complete and decisive defeat' of the enemy. Trump considered the victories achieved so far insufficient, reflecting a state of confusion in crisis management.

The newspaper believes that these fluctuations confirm the American administration's recklessness with a devastating war launched at the direct instigation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump's behavior since the beginning of the conflict has been characterized by aggression and boasting, without providing decisive answers on how to end this major military confrontation.

The White House failed to formulate a clear set of strategic objectives or to develop a post-war plan, despite talk of destroying Iran's nuclear program and ballistic arsenal. Trump also put forward ambitious goals such as changing the leadership in Tehran, similar to the Venezuelan model, and demanding unconditional surrender.

Despite continuous bombing and the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and an elite group of leaders on the first day, the Iranian regime showed no signs of imminent collapse. Instead, Tehran quickly appointed Mojtaba Khamenei as his father's successor, a clear indication of the regime's continuity and its ability to adapt to the blows.

Iran is currently fighting an existential battle through an asymmetric attrition strategy it had prepared for for many years, expanding the battlefronts to include Washington's allies. Iranian missiles and drones continue to target Israeli depth and vital interests in the Gulf region, leading to a partial paralysis of trade movement.

Navigation in the Strait of Hormuz has been significantly affected, forcing Gulf countries to reduce their oil and gas production to confront security threats. These countries are now bearing the brunt of the conflict, despite their prior warnings to Trump about the risks of sliding into an uncontrollable, comprehensive regional war.

On the internal Iranian front, the bet on a popular uprising to overthrow the regime during the war appears to be a losing one, as anxiety about personal safety dominates the Iranian street. The chances of a transition to a moderate government also seem very slim, as analysts predict that the disintegration of the regime would turn Iran into a failed and fragmented state.

Trump faces increasing political pressure as the midterm elections approach, with the escalating energy crisis threatening Republican chances of staying in power. Ultimately, any decision to stop the war will leave the Iranian regime weak but will give it an opportunity to claim steadfastness and a historic victory against American power.

Whatever path Trump chooses, others will pay the price for his folly towards Iran in a conflict with no happy ending.

Field sources reported today, Thursday, the martyrdom of a Palestinian citizen as a result of direct gunfire by Israeli occupation forces in the town of Beit Lahia, located north of the Gaza Strip. This crime comes within a series of continuous violations of the ceasefire agreement that came into effect in October of last year, with the targeted area falling outside the temporary military control of the occupation.

Regarding the attacks in Beit Lahia, medical sources confirmed the injury of a five-year-old child with serious wounds, after being directly targeted by Israeli occupation army bullets. Hospitals also received two other injured individuals who suffered gunshot wounds to their lower extremities, with their health conditions classified as moderate as a result of this blatant assault.

Gaza City witnessed a military escalation at dawn today, represented by intense aerial and artillery bombardment targeting the eastern neighborhoods of the city, especially the areas of Al-Zaytoun, Al-Shuja'iyya, and Al-Tuffah. This bombardment coincided with intense helicopter overflights that fired their machine guns heavily towards citizens' homes, causing a state of panic among the residents who suffer the woes of the siege.

In the coastal areas, the tents of the displaced were not spared from targeting, as Israeli warships fired heavily near the coast of Al-Shati refugee camp and the fishermen's port. These systematic attacks target gatherings of displaced people who have sought refuge in tents after their homes were destroyed, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in these overcrowded areas.

The central areas of the Strip were also subjected to concentrated artillery shelling, with several shells falling in the vicinity of Juhor ad-Dik area and northeast of Al-Bureij refugee camp. Occupation forces continue to target agricultural lands and border areas in an attempt to impose a new security reality that hinders the return of normal life for citizens in those areas.

In the southern part of the Strip, warplanes carried out two airstrikes targeting areas east of Khan Yunis city, while Al-Mawasi area northwest of Rafah was subjected to intense artillery shelling. Al-Mawasi area is considered one of the areas that shelters thousands of displaced people, making any military targeting of it a grave danger to the lives of unarmed civilians.

Official statistics indicate that the death toll from occupation violations of the ceasefire agreement since October 10, 2025, has risen to 651 martyrs and 1741 injured. These figures reflect the extent of Israeli disregard for international agreements and the continuation of the systematic killing policy against Palestinians despite the declared calm.

Regarding the total toll of the aggression that began in October 2023, relevant authorities have documented the martyrdom of 72,136 Palestinians and the injury of approximately 171,839 others with varying degrees of wounds. Civil defense and ambulance crews have also been able to recover the bodies of 756 martyrs from under the rubble and from areas of incursion since the last ceasefire agreement came into effect.

In a related context, two prisoners from the Gaza Strip were released through the Kerem Shalom crossing, while more than 9300 Palestinians remain in occupation prisons. Human rights reports confirm that prisoners face harsh conditions, including systematic torture and deliberate medical neglect, which puts their lives in real danger.

At the level of material destruction, United Nations estimates indicate that the cost of rebuilding what the occupation destroyed in the Gaza Strip exceeds 70 billion dollars. Widespread destruction has affected about 90% of civilian infrastructure, requiring immense international efforts and many years to restore life to the afflicted Strip.

The occupation army continues to commit daily violations of the ceasefire agreement, resulting in the martyrdom of 651 Palestinians since October 2025.

The Israeli Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) has published a new book that includes a comprehensive strategic approach to dealing with what it describes as the phenomenon of 'Hamasization' in the Gaza Strip. This study, prepared by researchers Ofer Guterman and Tara Feldman, is based on an in-depth analysis of international and Arab experiences in the fields of deradicalization and community rebuilding after armed conflicts.

Research Note No. 253, issued in early 2026, focuses on the necessity of combining security, political, and social tools to undermine Hamas's influence. Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultations reviewed this paper in an analytical reading presented by Dr. Nihal Al-Sheikh Khalil, clarifying the dimensions of the Israeli vision for the future of the Strip.

The study traces the roots of what it calls 'radicalism' in Gaza to historical accumulations that began with the Nakba of 1948 and developed during the period of Israeli administration after 1967. The paper considers Hamas's rise in the 2006 elections and the subsequent siege in 2007 as the most prominent stage in solidifying the movement's presence within the societal structure.

The Israeli reading emphasizes that Hamas's strength is not limited to the military aspect but extends to include a wide network of religious and charitable institutions. This social penetration makes any attempt to reduce the movement's influence a task closely linked to changing the overall economic and social environment of the Strip's residents.

The study proposes a three-level approach that begins at the individual level through intellectual and social rehabilitation programs for individuals involved in the movement's frameworks. This step aims to dismantle direct ideological ties and provide alternative paths for integration into society away from previous organizational frameworks.

At the community level, the study calls for involving families, religious leaders, and traditional social networks in formulating and disseminating an alternative discourse. Research sources believe that confronting extremist ideology requires a social incubator that rejects violence and adopts civil concepts consistent with the proposed vision for the future.

At the institutional level, the paper emphasizes the necessity of radical reforms in governance, education, and judicial systems to enhance the rule of law. This vision focuses on creating economic and political 'attraction factors' that convince residents of the viability of alternatives to the governance model provided by Hamas over the past two decades.

The study recalls historical models of deradicalization, citing the experiences of Germany and Japan after World War II as successful examples of dismantling totalitarian ideologies. It illustrates how educational and media institutions were rebuilt in those countries to ensure that old regimes would not return to power.

In contrast, the study warned against repeating the failures of other international experiences, as happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The paper attributed these failures to the persistence of deep social divisions and the weakness of national institutions that were supposed to lead the process of democratic and intellectual transformation.

At the regional level, the researchers observed varying Arab approaches to dealing with Islamist movements, ranging from purely security measures to political containment. The study pointed to models in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Morocco, where attempts at cultural transformation occurred through educational curriculum and religious institution reforms.

For any program in Gaza to succeed, researchers stipulate the availability of a complex political and institutional environment, starting with the formation of an interim Palestinian administration that enjoys broad regional and international support. This administration must oversee major reconstruction projects and improve the living prospects of the population to ensure their loyalty to the new system.

The study identifies four integrated pathways to ensure the sustainability of results: the security path, a clear political horizon, economic reconstruction, and social transformation. Sources believe that the absence of any of these pathways will necessarily lead to the failure of the comprehensive strategy and a return to previous conditions.

Despite the detailed proposal, the study's authors acknowledge the difficulty of implementing this strategy on the ground given the current political complexities. The institutional reality in Gaza and the field entanglements pose serious challenges that may hinder the application of the international models reviewed in the research paper.

The study concluded that the primary purpose of presenting these scenarios is to stimulate broader academic and political discussions about the 'day after' the war. These proposals remain contingent on international consensus and the ability to find a Palestinian partner capable of implementing these radical transformations in the structure of Gazan society.

Any program to reduce Hamas's influence in Gaza requires complex political and institutional conditions, including the formation of an interim Palestinian administration with regional and international support.

The Coordination of the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, which includes an alliance of armed factions, issued a strongly worded statement addressed to Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa. In its statement, the Coordination warned against any military movement targeting Lebanese territories, indicating that such a step would be met with a decisive and unprecedented response.

The Iraqi factions considered any Syrian military activity towards Lebanon as a clear declaration of war on all parties of what is known as the 'Axis of Resistance'. They stressed that this warning represents the final ultimatum to the Syrian leadership to avoid sliding into a direct confrontation that could ignite a widespread regional conflict that cannot be controlled.

The statement indicated that any hostile movement towards Lebanon, regardless of the justifications given, would be viewed as an act coordinated with international powers and the Israeli occupation. Sources confirmed that the Iraqi Resistance is closely monitoring field movements and will not hesitate to turn the region into an open battlefield if the red lines are crossed.

These developments come amid escalating regional tensions, as Iraqi factions with close ties to Iran are active within the strategy of unity of fronts. These forces have expressed their full readiness for direct military intervention if the scope of the confrontation expands to include new parties in the ongoing conflict in the region.

On the ground, Israeli military attacks continued in various areas of Lebanon, leading to significant human and material losses among civilians. According to data issued by the Lebanese Ministry of Health, recent raids caused a number of casualties, further complicating the security and humanitarian situation on the ground.

In a related context, the United Nations witnessed a prominent diplomatic move, as the Security Council approved a draft resolution condemning recent Iranian missile attacks. The resolution targeted condemnations related to strikes that hit Gulf countries hosting American military bases, considering them a threat to regional security and stability.

The draft resolution, submitted by the Kingdom of Bahrain on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, was supported by 13 out of 15 Security Council members. In contrast, both Russia and China chose to abstain from voting, reflecting a divergence in international positions on how to deal with the recent Iranian escalation in the region.

Regional parties criticized the formula of the UN resolution, as it focused exclusively on Iranian attacks without addressing military operations carried out by the United States or Israel. Observers believed that this approach gives the resolution a unilateral character, as it ignores strikes that targeted Iranian depth and interests linked to Tehran in neighboring countries.

It is worth noting that the draft resolution received widespread support outside the Security Council, with more than 130 member states of the United Nations General Assembly endorsing it. The move came on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, which include Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and Oman, in addition to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, reflecting a relative Arab and international consensus.

The region is in a state of maximum alert with the intertwining of military and political fronts, where the direct conflict between Iran and the Israeli occupation intersects with internal issues in countries such as Syria and Lebanon. International powers fear that any miscalculation on the ground could lead to a comprehensive explosion affecting energy sources and international shipping lanes.

Amid these threats, concerns arise about the transformation of Syrian territories into a launching pad for military operations that may target Lebanese depth or vice versa. Field reports confirm that armed factions in Iraq have already begun to strengthen their presence and operational coordination with their allies in the region to confront any emergency scenarios that political shifts in Damascus may impose.

For its part, the Syrian presidency did not issue an immediate official response to the threats of the Iraqi Resistance, but the political atmosphere indicates a state of cautious anticipation. The Syrian government faces increasing pressure to balance its regional and international relations in light of the rapid changes that followed recent developments in the power structure in Damascus.

On the humanitarian front, international organizations warned that the expansion of the war to directly include Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon would lead to an unprecedented catastrophe. International calls for restraint and recourse to diplomatic solutions continue, although the language of military threat has become dominant in the official discourse of conflicting factions and regional powers.

In conclusion, the scene remains open to all possibilities, awaiting what the coming days will bring in terms of movements on the ground or political initiatives behind the scenes. All eyes remain on the Lebanese-Syrian border, which has become a focal point in the escalating geopolitical conflict between major powers and their allies in the Middle East.

Any hostile movement towards Lebanese territories, whatever the pretexts, will be considered an all-out declaration of war that turns the region into an open battlefield.

Israeli Defense Minister, Israel Katz, announced today, Thursday, official directives to the army command to be fully prepared to expand the scope of military operations over Lebanese territories. These statements came in the context of a direct threat to seize geographical areas within Lebanon, under the pretext of stopping the rocket attacks carried out by Hezbollah towards northern settlements.

Katz confirmed in an official statement issued by him that, in coordination with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the army has been put on alert to carry out broader ground operations aimed at what he described as 'restoring security' to the border areas. The minister indicated that Israel will not be content with defense, but will move to the stage of imposing field control if threats from across the border continue.

In the context of political warnings, Katz sent a strongly worded message to the Lebanese government, demanding it impose its sovereignty and prevent Hezbollah from launching rockets. He warned that if the Lebanese state is unable to control its territories, Israeli forces will take on this task themselves through direct incursion and field control.

For its part, Hebrew media sources revealed that Tel Aviv conveyed threats through Western diplomatic channels and American mediation, hinting at bombing Lebanese government infrastructure. These pressures come in an attempt to push the government in Beirut towards taking strict measures to curb the military operations led by Hezbollah against Israeli targets.

On the ground, the occupation army admitted to being subjected to one of the largest rocket barrages since the escalation began, with Hezbollah launching about 200 rockets during Wednesday night and Thursday dawn. Military sources described this batch as 'the largest,' reflecting a qualitative escalation in the open military confrontation between the two sides along the Blue Line.

Regarding human casualties, Lebanese medical sources reported the martyrdom of 17 people and the injury of at least 32 others as a result of a series of airstrikes that targeted various areas. The intense Israeli strikes focused on the capital Beirut and its southern suburbs, in addition to towns in the South and the Beqaa in the eastern part of the country.

Al-Ramleh Al-Baida area in the heart of the capital Beirut witnessed a horrific massacre, where an Israeli raid led to the martyrdom of 8 citizens and the injury of 31 others with varying degrees of wounds. The raids also targeted the town of Aramoun south of Beirut, resulting in the martyrdom of 3 people, including children, as part of the occupation's targeting of densely populated residential areas.

In southern Lebanon, an occupation drone targeted a civilian car in the town of Deir Antar in the Bint Jbeil district, which led to the immediate martyrdom of one of the passengers. The town of Barish in the Tyre district was also subjected to a violent airstrike that killed 3 people, while search operations continued for missing persons under the rubble in several targeted sites.

The airstrikes extended to include the Beqaa region in eastern Lebanon, where warplanes targeted the towns of Qasr Naba, Duris, and Ain Bourdai in the vicinity of Baalbek city. Despite the intensity of the bombing and the destruction of a number of facilities and homes, there were no immediate reports of casualties in those areas, amidst a state of widespread displacement of residents.

In the Bint Jbeil district, the occupation intensified its raids on the towns of Yater, Haris, and Kafra, where warplanes carried out successive raids targeting residential neighborhoods and agricultural lands. These developments come amidst a deteriorating humanitarian situation, with the Lebanese Ministry of Health continuing to update the numbers of victims falling due to the continuous shelling around the clock.

I instructed the Israeli army to prepare to expand operations in Lebanon and to restore calm and security to the northern communities, and we will take control of territories ourselves if the Lebanese government does not prevent Hezbollah's threats.

Medical and field sources reported that three Palestinian citizens, including a child not exceeding five years old, were injured as a result of direct gunfire by Israeli occupation forces in the town of Beit Lahia, north of the Gaza Strip. The sources clarified that the child's condition was described as serious, while the other two suffered gunshot wounds to their lower extremities and were transferred to the hospital for treatment amidst complex health conditions in the northern part of the Strip.

The early hours of Thursday witnessed an intense military escalation, as occupation aircraft and artillery carried out a series of raids targeting the eastern neighborhoods of Gaza City. The shelling focused on the Shuja'iyya, Zeitoun, and Tuffah areas, coinciding with intensive helicopter flights that fired their machine guns at citizens' homes and properties in those populated areas.

Offshore, Israeli warships continued to target the Palestinian coast, firing heavily near Al-Shati refugee camp and the fishermen's port. The shelling also hit the tents of displaced people scattered in the coastal area, causing panic among families who had sought refuge in those areas in search of safety lost since the beginning of the aggression.

The central areas of the Strip were not spared from targeting, as Israeli artillery shelled areas east of Juhor ad-Dik and northeast of Al-Bureij refugee camp with heavy shells. These military movements come amidst a temporary control by the occupation army over some axes under ceasefire understandings that have not prevented the continuation of field aggressions.

In the southern part of the Strip, warplanes launched airstrikes inside what is known as the 'Yellow Line' east of Khan Yunis city, coinciding with artillery shelling that targeted the Al-Mawasi area. The 'Yellow Line' is known as a hypothetical boundary to which the occupation army temporarily withdrew, separating its controlled areas from areas where Palestinians are allowed to be present, but it witnesses repeated violations.

On the statistical front, the Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip announced a new update on the toll of victims of the ongoing genocide war since October 2023. The ministry stated in its statement that the number of martyrs has risen to 72,136, while the number of injured has reached 171,839, in one of the largest humanitarian disasters in modern history.

Medical reports indicated that hospitals received one martyr and nine injured during the past 24 hours due to the ongoing aggressions. With this update, the toll of victims of ceasefire violations, which has been in effect for months, rises to 651 martyrs and 1741 injured, posing significant field challenges to the agreement amidst continued targeting.

Furthermore, the Ministry of Health revealed that specialized teams have been able to recover the bodies of 756 martyrs from under the rubble and from various areas since the ceasefire came into effect. These figures reflect the massive destruction caused by military operations, as many bodies are still missing under the debris of destroyed homes that were previously inaccessible.

It is worth noting that this tragic reality comes two years after a comprehensive war launched by the occupying state with widespread American support, which led to the destruction of about 90% of the infrastructure in the Strip. UN reports estimate the cost of rebuilding what the occupation destroyed at about 70 billion dollars, amidst a suffocating humanitarian and economic crisis afflicting the residents of the besieged Strip.

The toll of victims of ceasefire violations has risen to 651 martyrs and 1741 injured since the agreement came into effect.

In his first official appearance after assuming his position, the new Iranian leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, delivered a firm message via state television, in which he stressed the cohesion of the Iranian state and its success in thwarting attempts at division that targeted the country, while at the same time calling on all segments of the people for national unity to face the current challenges.

On the military front, Khamenei affirmed that Tehran is committed to its right to respond to assassinations and targeting of its symbols, indicating that Iranian military operations will continue and will focus exclusively on military bases in the region. He also issued a direct warning about the necessity of the immediate dismantling of all American bases, considering their presence a legitimate target for attacks if they continue.

Regarding international navigation, the new leader put forward an escalatory vision by announcing the necessity of keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed, describing this step as a strategic and effective pressure card against adversaries. In parallel with these threats, Khamenei tried to reassure the regional environment by affirming that Tehran seeks to build friendly relations with neighboring countries and that it harbors no intentions to target its surrounding countries.

Iran will not refrain from avenging the blood of its martyrs, and the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed as a tool of pressure on the enemy.

The Israeli army announced today, Thursday, the launch of a large-scale military operation targeting various areas deep within Iran, as the direct confrontation entered its thirteenth day. Military sources confirmed that the raids primarily focused on what they described as infrastructure belonging to the Iranian regime, in a move aimed at undermining military capabilities and supply routes.

In a significant development, the military statement revealed the targeting of the 'Taleqan' site located within the Parchin military complex southeast of the capital Tehran, indicating that this site was used for developing technical capabilities related to the nuclear program. These strikes come in the context of Tel Aviv's declared attempts to disrupt any Iranian progress in the field of unconventional armament.

On the other hand, the Israeli Ministry of Health revealed updated data on the extent of casualties among Israelis since the outbreak of the current war. The ministry clarified that the total number of injured reached 2745 people, with 85 of them still receiving medical care in emergency departments and various hospitals as a result of the continuous rocket barrages.

According to the health report, the medical condition of the injured varies between serious and moderate, with 11 injured in critical condition and 10 others in moderate condition. Statistics also indicated that the past twenty-four hours alone saw 179 injured admitted to hospitals, including cases suffering from psychological trauma and panic due to the explosions.

Regarding human casualties, the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University reported the killing of 14 Israelis since the start of the joint military escalation between Israel and the United States against Iran. Despite these figures, observers doubt their accuracy, suggesting that the actual numbers are higher given the strict military censorship imposed on the media.

For its part, Haaretz newspaper highlighted the effectiveness of the Iranian response, confirming that the rocket shelling resulted in warheads and cluster munitions falling in more than 60 different locations within the greater Tel Aviv area. These attacks caused extensive material damage in urban areas, raising questions about the efficiency of air defense systems in countering modern drones and missiles.

The roots of this round of conflict date back to February 28, when Israeli and American forces began a widespread aggression targeting security leaders and vital facilities in Iran. These initial attacks resulted in the deaths of hundreds, prompting Tehran to respond by launching successive waves of ballistic missiles and drones towards Israeli targets.

The Iranian response was not limited to inside Israel but also extended to targeting US sites and interests in several Arab countries in the region. These operations resulted in casualties and damage to civilian facilities, which was met with widespread condemnation from the countries that witnessed these attacks, demanding the necessity of stopping the escalation and sparing the region the ravages of a comprehensive war.

Field reports indicate that the Israeli army relies on accurate intelligence in its current raids to try to paralyze the movement of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. However, the continued falling of rockets on vital centers in Israel puts the government under increasing internal pressure to provide protection for settlers and secure the home front, which is suffering from partial paralysis.

Amidst this complex scene, international parties continue their warnings of the region sliding into an uncontrollable regional conflict, especially with the targeting of facilities related to the nuclear program. The death and injury toll remains likely to rise with the continuation of mutual airstrikes and the absence of any prospect for diplomatic de-escalation at present.

The air force attacked an additional site within the Iranian nuclear program, the Taleqan site, which was used to develop vital capabilities in the field of nuclear weapons.

The Palestinian narrative has long faced immense challenges in reaching global screens, especially in Hollywood, which for decades remained a closed space for narratives from the Middle East. As the 98th Academy Awards ceremony approaches, the cinematic scene appears to be undergoing an unprecedented historical transformation with three Palestinian films making it to the awards shortlist at once.

This intense presence raises fundamental questions about the beginning of the breaking of the cultural siege that has surrounded the Palestinian cause in global cinema for many years. After a journey that began with the film 'Divine Intervention' in 2003, and continued with Hany Abu-Assad's nominations for 'Paradise Now' and 'Omar', leading to the win of 'No Other Land' in 2025, it seems that 2026 represents the peak of this creative accumulation.

Leading the scene is the film 'The Voice of Hind Rajab' by Tunisian director Kaouther Ben Hania, which is nominated for Best International Feature Film. The film is based on a real tragedy that shook global conscience in January 2024, documenting the last moments of the child Hind Rajab through real audio recordings of her calls with Palestinian Red Crescent crews.

Ben Hania managed to transform this painful memory into a universal cinematic testimony that condemns violence and champions humanity, which led the film to receive an exceptional reception at the Venice Film Festival. The audience stood applauding the work for 23 continuous minutes, one of the longest applause periods in the history of the prestigious festival, expressing deep emotional impact from the story.

The second film, 'Palestine 36' by director Annemarie Jacir, takes viewers back to a pivotal historical era: the Great Palestinian Revolt against the British Mandate. This work is considered one of the largest Palestinian cinematic productions, highlighting the roots of the conflict and the colonial role in shaping the contemporary reality of the region.

The production of 'Palestine 36' faced major on-the-ground challenges, as the crew had to move filming from the West Bank to Jordan due to the outbreak of war in October 2023. Despite these difficulties, the film succeeded in garnering widespread international acclaim, especially at the Toronto Film Festival, despite Israeli attempts to restrict it, which included raiding its screenings in occupied Jerusalem.

The third film in this race is 'The Remainder' by director Shireen Dabees, which presents a human epic spanning three generations of Palestinians. The work traces the journey of a Palestinian family from the Nakba of 1948 until the late 1980s, illustrating how collective memory and identity are transmitted across decades despite displacement and refuge.

As with the other films, Dabees had to move filming locations to Cyprus, Greece, and Jordan due to security conditions in Palestine. The director considered that the arrival of these films collectively to global awards platforms reflects a belated but necessary international recognition of the importance of Palestinian stories and their ability to touch the human conscience.

Beyond the artistic aspect, these films fought a fierce battle in the distribution corridors within the United States, where major Hollywood companies preferred to avoid these politically controversial works. This reluctance pushed filmmakers to collaborate with independent distribution companies such as 'Willla' and 'Watermelon Pictures' to ensure the narrative reached the American audience.

These distribution difficulties reflect the fragility of Palestinian cinema's presence on major digital platforms, especially after the incident of removing dozens of Palestinian films from the 'Netflix' platform in 2024. Nevertheless, the insistence on being present in independent cinemas and festivals has contributed to creating a new cinematic awareness towards the issue.

In the face of these challenges, widespread solidarity campaigns emerged from Hollywood's A-list stars, who decided to break the silence and openly support Palestinian cinema. The 'Talking Palestine 36' campaign saw the participation of prominent names such as Mark Ruffalo, Susan Sarandon, and Riz Ahmed, which gave additional momentum to these films among voters.

This support from international stars reflects a radical shift in the internal discussion in Hollywood, where talking about Palestinian rights has become more acceptable and common. Artists no longer fear expressing their humanitarian stances towards the Middle East, which has helped highlight the artistic and aesthetic value of these cinematic works.

Indeed, the numbers for the 2026 season speak of an unprecedented breakthrough; the presence of three films on the shortlist in one year is an achievement that surpasses everything achieved in the past two decades. This development indicates that the Palestinian narrative is no longer just a fleeting 'exception' at festivals, but has become an authentic and established voice at the heart of the industry.

In conclusion, the arrival of these films to the 'Dolby' stage in Hollywood remains a victory in itself, regardless of the final results of the awards distribution. The mere presentation of these stories on the highest global cinematic platform means that the cultural siege has begun to crumble before the power of art and its ability to convey human truth from the heart of suffering.

The Oscar nomination is not about me personally as much as it is about the child who has become a human symbol for the story the film tells.

Oman's Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi affirmed on Wednesday that his country will not normalize with Israel and will not join the "Peace Council," stressing that the current war's "goal is to weaken Iran, reshape the region, push for normalization, and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state." He also predicted that the war would stop soon, but emphasized the "necessity of preparing for the worst-case scenarios."

During a meeting with editors-in-chief of local newspapers, Al Busaidi said that "the Sultanate of Oman will not join the Peace Council, and will not normalize with Israel," affirming that his country's stance on regional issues is firm, according to what was reported by Oman newspaper.

In his reading of the background of the American-Israeli war against Iran, Al Busaidi believed that its true goal "is not limited to the nuclear file but goes beyond that to weakening Iran, reshaping the region, pushing for normalization, in addition to preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state, and weakening everyone who supports the project."

Targeting the Region

The Omani minister pointed to "a broader scheme targeting the region," clarifying that Iran is not the only target in it, and that "many regional parties realize this, but they are betting that accommodating the United States may lead it to modify its decisions and orientations."

Al Busaidi believes that the United States "would not have obtained greater concessions from Iran through war than those achieved through negotiation." He noted that the recent negotiations reached advanced stages, which included "Iran's commitment not to possess nuclear material that could produce a bomb, with a commitment not to accumulate or store enriched materials, and to convert existing stockpiles into fuel that cannot be returned to its previous state."

The Omani minister explained that the American and Israeli attacks on Iran "threaten to harm the legal framework that has provided protection and stability to the countries of the region for decades."

He also stressed that the Sultanate of Oman "is firm on the principles of its foreign policy despite the dangerous transformations the region is witnessing," noting that Muscat "continues to work to stop the war and return to the path of diplomacy."}

The Muslim Brotherhood was launched in 1928 as a project aimed at restoring the Islamic Caliphate, which had fallen four years prior. Its founder, Hassan al-Banna, established a methodology focused on building a comprehensive Muslim individual, combining spirit, mind, and body. This emergence coincided with a wide intellectual movement in the Islamic world that discussed the repercussions of the absence of religious political authority, and Muhammad Rashid Rida's book 'The Caliphate' was one of the most prominent pillars of this movement.

The group's relationship with the authorities during Al-Banna's era was characterized by flexibility and a demand for gradual reform. The Brotherhood engaged in educational and economic work and participated in parliamentary elections. At the same time, Al-Banna did not hesitate to send firm messages to heads of government, such as Mustafa El-Nahhas, demanding the abolition of usurious laws and the reform of the banking system in accordance with Islamic Sharia, warning of a 'Quranic revolution' if popular demands were ignored.

Al-Banna identified two strategic dangers facing the Egyptian state: the British military occupation and the Zionist project in Palestine. This prompted him to establish the 'Special Secret Apparatus' as a military arm to confront these challenges. The group succeeded in gaining a broad popular base that enabled it to compete with the venerable Wafd Party, and even force it to negotiate with them to form electoral alliances in several regions.

The Brotherhood played a pivotal role in confronting the currents of Westernization and Pharaonic tendencies led by intellectuals such as Taha Hussein and Abbas Mahmoud al-Aqqad. These intellectuals were later forced to appease the rising Islamic current by writing books about Islamic figures. This influence was further embodied in their field participation with fighting battalions during the 1948 Palestine War, which raised the group's political and popular standing to an unprecedented level.

The results of the 1948 war and the establishment of the occupation state led to a radical shift in the Egyptian government's dealings with the Brotherhood. Arrest and confiscation campaigns began, culminating in the assassination of Hassan al-Banna in 1949 and the banning of the group. With Hassan al-Hudaybi assuming the position of General Guide in 1951, he made decisive decisions to abolish the secret apparatus and emphasize that the group was a da'wah (preaching) and educational organization that rejected violence and secrecy in political work.

Egypt witnessed rapid events in the early 1950s, starting with the abrogation of the 1936 treaty and the outbreak of the Cairo Fire, leading to the July 1952 coup led by Gamal Abdel Nasser. Despite initial agreement, a major clash soon occurred after the assassination attempt on Abdel Nasser in 1954, which led to the imprisonment of Brotherhood leaders and the execution of some of them, and the emergence of a new ideology within the prisons led by the writer and thinker Sayyid Qutb.

Sayyid Qutb's writings, most notably 'In the Shade of the Quran,' came as a direct reaction to the Nasserist regime's tendencies, which sought to consolidate Arab nationalism, secularism, and Marxist socialism. Qutb considered these ideologies to represent 'modern jahiliyyah' (ignorance/paganism) that sought to distance religion from life, emphasizing that a Muslim's true identity is their creed, and that ruling by what Allah has revealed became an individual obligation to restore the nation's identity.

Qutb proposed the concept of the 'believing vanguard' that must emotionally isolate itself from the jahili society to build a solid base capable of change, which sparked widespread debate about the idea of 'excommunicating society.' Analysts believe that Qutb's soaring literary language contributed to the ambiguity of some of his concepts, opening the door to extremist interpretations by groups that later emerged from the Brotherhood's fold, such as 'Takfir wal-Hijra.'

In contrast, Guide Hassan al-Hudaybi countered these ideas through his famous book 'Preachers, Not Judges,' refuting the arguments for excommunication and setting strict jurisprudential conditions for judging individuals. Al-Hudaybi emphasized the need to distinguish between criticizing the political system and excommunicating society, stressing that the group's mission is da'wah and guidance, not issuing judicial rulings on people's faith.

This intellectual divergence between Qutb and Al-Hudaybi created a silent division within the group's ranks. Al-Hudaybi's attack on Qutb's writings limited their organizational benefit within the Brotherhood. Nevertheless, Qutb's ideas remained an inspiration for many jihadist movements outside the official framework of the group, which adopted the concepts of separation and jahiliyyah in a more radical and confrontational manner with the state and society.

The author believes that the stalling of the Brotherhood's renaissance project is due to the failure of the subsequent leadership to integrate the organizational structure established by Al-Banna with the precise political diagnosis of the Nasserist reality provided by Qutb. While Al-Hudaybi adhered to traditional da'wah work, the new reality required a development in the tools of intellectual and political confrontation with a system that adopted material socialism and secular nationalism.

Sayyid Qutb's use of the term 'jahili society' instead of 'umma' (nation) led him into linguistic and jurisprudential problems, as the umma in the Quranic concept is not excommunicated as a whole. The accusations of excommunication could have been avoided if the discourse had focused on 'jahiliyyah of governance' as a political and legislative system, instead of generalizing the term, which in the minds of some extended to peoples and individuals.

Sayyid Qutb succeeded in diagnosing the deviations that marred the Nasserist experience, especially in aspects of class struggle and fighting what was called 'religious reactionism.' However, this diagnosis did not find a disciplined activist path within the group due to fears of sliding into violence, leaving the field open for individual interpretations and sub-groups that adopted violence as a means of change.

In conclusion, the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt remains a model for the major transformations that swept through Islamic movements in the twentieth century, between the ambitions of comprehensive establishment and the pressures of security persecution. The debate surrounding Sayyid Qutb's legacy and Hassan al-Hudaybi's methodology remains a fundamental axis for understanding the crisis of contemporary Islamic political thought and its ability to adapt to the modern nation-state.

The Muslim Brotherhood will declare a comprehensive Quranic revolution if governments do not accelerate the necessary reforms.

Groups of extremist settlers attacked the village of Duma, south of Nablus city, at dawn today, Thursday, where they set fire to the entrance of the village mosque and spray-painted racist slogans in Hebrew on its outer walls. This crime comes in the context of a systematic escalation targeting Islamic holy sites in the occupied West Bank, coinciding with the holy month of Ramadan.

Local sources reported that the villagers, with the support of civil defense crews, were able to control the fire and prevent it from spreading to the main prayer hall inside the mosque. Despite the quick response, the fire caused clear material damage to the outer gate, and the dense smoke also damaged parts of the carpets and disfigured the interior facades.

For his part, anti-settlement activist Suleiman Dawabsheh confirmed that the settlers infiltrated under the cover of darkness to carry out their assault, leaving behind drawings of the Star of David and incitement slogans. He explained that this attack is not the first of its kind, but rather falls within a series of violations aimed at intimidating residents and pushing them to leave their lands for the sake of settlement expansion.

In an official reaction, the Palestinian Ministry of Endowments and Religious Affairs warned of the danger of the increasing attempts to burn mosques, considering them part of a strategic plan to undermine the Palestinian presence. The ministry linked these field attacks to the continued closure of Al-Aqsa Mosque by the occupation authorities and the restriction of worshippers since late last February, under the pretext of a state of emergency.

On the ground, Israeli occupation forces launched a wide raid campaign in several cities in the West Bank, resulting in the arrest of at least 19 citizens, including a child and a released prisoner. These operations focused on Nablus, Tulkarm, Qalqilya, and Hebron, where they included storming homes, vandalizing their contents, and conducting field investigations with dozens of young men before releasing some of them.

In the town of Beita, south of Nablus, army forces have been continuing a wide military operation since the early morning hours, which included converting a number of residential homes into military barracks and observation points. Field sources indicated that occupation soldiers subjected entire families to harsh interrogations, in a move described by human rights activists as falling within the policy of collective punishment practiced against Palestinian villages and towns.

Official statistics indicate a sharp escalation in the pace of violence since October 2023, where settler attacks alone have led to the martyrdom of 42 Palestinians. According to the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission, the total number of victims of occupation and settler attacks in the West Bank has exceeded 1125 martyrs, while the number of arrests has reached record figures, close to 22,000 cases of arrest.

These attacks are part of a systematic plan by settlers to control Palestinian land by undermining the security and steadfastness of citizens.

Prominent Israeli journalist, Uri Misgav, launched a scathing attack on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump, considering them to be leading the region towards a comprehensive and insane confrontation. In an article published by 'Haaretz' newspaper, Misgav described the two leaders as narcissistic and burdened by deep political and judicial crises, which drives them to make decisions completely detached from the on-the-ground and strategic reality.

Misgav considered the current Israeli government to be the most fundamentalist and anti-democratic in the country's history, yet its leaders do not hesitate to lecture others on democracy. He pointed out that the current military leadership has transformed into an obedient technocratic tool that executes orders and uses excessive force without restraint, in the complete absence of any clear strategic horizon to end the continuous bleeding.

Even the new US Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, did not escape the writer's criticism, who described him as a 'war minister' coming from the Fox News benches, referring to his controversial background and association with the far-right. Misgav believes that the presence of figures like Hegseth in Washington, and Israel Katz in Tel Aviv, reflects a deterioration in the standards of security and political competence in favor of narrow personal and partisan loyalties.

Misgav described the current military operations as a 'luxury war' managed from the sky through intense aerial bombardment in open corridors that face no real threats, but whose exorbitant price is paid by civilians. He affirmed that the bombing targeting vital facilities and schools in the region serves only the agenda of escalation, while the real 'cannon fodder' remains the residents of the region in Israel, Gulf states, Lebanon, and Iran.

Misgav criticized the contradiction in the political discourse of Netanyahu and Trump, who encourage the Iranian people to revolt against their regime, while at the same time raining bombs on their country targeting oil tanks and vital facilities. He believes that this contradiction reflects the absence of a real vision for what is called 'changing the face of the Middle East,' turning it into an empty slogan that covers up the failure to achieve tangible goals.

Regarding the management of the war, the article indicated that objectives change daily according to Trump's whims and improvised statements, while Netanyahu hides behind recorded messages and refuses to face real journalism. Promises have shifted from 'destroying the nuclear program' and 'eliminating Hezbollah' to merely 'postponing threats' or 'damaging capabilities,' formulas that reflect the inability to achieve 'absolute victory.'

Misgav warned against a repeat of the 'Lebanese quagmire' scenario, pointing out that the Israeli leadership sells illusions to the public about eliminating threats for generations, then returns to demand they stay in shelters for many months. He strongly criticized the pumping of billions of shekels from the budget deficit to the army, settlers, and Haredim, at the expense of the struggling economy and public services suffering from collapse.

Misgav concluded his article by expressing his exasperation with the 'lies of the Israeli leadership' that promotes the continuation of the war until upcoming holidays without a clear timeline. He stressed that this confrontation, which he calls 'the roar of the deranged,' aims only to serve the leaders' survival in their positions, warning that the price will be a new sinking into endless regional crises, and the loss of opportunities for normal life that society aspires to.

This war has one name for me: the roar of the deranged; a war into which Israel and the United States were plunged by two men detached from reality.

Indonesian Defense Minister, Shafrie Shamsuddin, affirmed that his country's participation in any international security force within the Gaza Strip is contingent on developments within the 'Peace Council'. The minister clarified in press statements that Jakarta has completed its logistical and human preparations to deploy approximately eight thousand soldiers, who will be deployed in specific time phases, noting that the commitments of other countries participating in the international force came with fewer numbers than the Indonesian contribution.

In a related context, the spokesperson for the Indonesian presidency, Prastiyo Hadi, revealed that a round of anticipated negotiations will take place before the completion of a payment of one billion US dollars, which is the amount required to obtain permanent membership in the Council. These diplomatic moves come at a time when Jakarta is seeking to ensure that its financial and military contribution has a real impact on regional stability and the support of legitimate Palestinian rights.

Indonesian President, Prabowo Subianto, had previously hinted at the possibility of a complete withdrawal from the 'Peace Council', established by the US administration, if it became clear that this entity does not provide tangible benefits to Palestinians. The government statement stressed that Jakarta's foreign policy places the interests of the Palestinian people and Indonesian national interests as a top priority that cannot be compromised for international membership.

The Indonesian government faces increasing internal pressure, as Islamic groups have expressed their opposition to the decision to join the Council and participate in peacekeeping forces under ceasefire agreements. President Subianto has sought to allay these concerns during his meetings with leaders of religious associations, emphasizing that the purpose of being in the Council is to strive for a lasting and comprehensive peace that ends the suffering of the Strip's residents.

For its part, the Indonesian Ulema Council, which is the highest religious authority in the country, entered the crisis by officially demanding that the government withdraw its membership from the international council. Observers believe that the Indonesian position is characterized by extreme caution, as the government tries to balance its role as an emerging regional power with its historical and religious commitment to the Palestinian cause, making the decision to deploy forces dependent on the extent to which international parties respond to Indonesian demands.

Indonesia is ready to deploy eight thousand soldiers in phases, but this decision will primarily depend on the current status of the Peace Council and its effectiveness.