A new Emirati aid plane, the last within the “Hamid Air Bridge” launched under the directives of Sheikh Humaid bin Rashid Al Nuaimi, Member of the Supreme Council and Ruler of Ajman, landed at Al Arish International Airport. The plane carried 100 tons of food aid and more than 3,200 food parcels, as part of the continuous humanitarian efforts carried out by the UAE within Operation “Gallant Knight 3” to support the Palestinian brethren in the Gaza Strip and alleviate their humanitarian suffering.

With the arrival of this plane, the curtain falls on the “Hamid Air Bridge,” after a humanitarian journey that lasted for about two months, during which 600 tons of relief and food materials were transported through continuous flights, in a scene that embodies a firm Emirati commitment to continue supporting Palestinians and enhancing urgent humanitarian response to mitigate the repercussions of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

The Emirati humanitarian aid team in Al Arish received the plane immediately upon its arrival, and the shipment was directly transferred to the Emirati humanitarian aid logistics center in the city, in preparation for its entry into the Gaza Strip according to approved mechanisms, ensuring its rapid delivery to beneficiaries and meeting the basic needs of affected families.

The “Hamid Air Bridge” comes as part of the humanitarian initiatives launched in cooperation with Operation “Gallant Knight 3,” with the aim of supporting the people of Gaza and enhancing urgent humanitarian response, by operating relief flights carrying food and relief aid to the city of Al Arish, in preparation for its transfer to the Strip.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has issued an urgent appeal to U.S. authorities, demanding the reopening of the investigation into the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. The committee stated that the lack of tangible progress in the case, despite four years passing since the crime, represents a significant failure to protect an American citizen targeted while performing her journalistic duties.

In an official letter sent to Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel, the CPJ called for the resumption of stalled legal proceedings. The letter emphasized that Abu Akleh's killing by Israeli occupation forces in the occupied West Bank in 2022 requires a swift and impartial response from the U.S. government to ensure justice.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced the opening of an investigation into the incident in November 2022, but the committee noted that this path has not yielded any real results to date. The CPJ described this delay as a 'dismal failure' reflecting laxity in dealing with a crime committed by a foreign army against a journalist who was clearly wearing a press vest.

The details of the crime date back to May 11, 2022, when Abu Akleh was covering an incursion by occupation forces into the Jenin refugee camp in the northern West Bank. Cameras documented the moments of her fatal injury and collapse, at a time when her colleagues were trying to reach her under a barrage of deliberate gunfire targeting media crews.

For its part, Israeli authorities tried from the outset to evade responsibility by blaming Palestinian gunmen, which independent investigations later refuted. Despite the Israeli occupation army admitting in September 2022 to a 'high probability' that she was killed by its soldiers' fire by mistake, it refused to take any punitive measures against those involved.

The CPJ quoted the family of the martyr Shireen Abu Akleh expressing deep disappointment over the inaction of successive U.S. administrations. The family believes that the absence of accountability gives a green light for the continued targeting of journalists in the field without fear of international legal consequences.

In a related context, an annual report by the Committee to Protect Journalists, issued last February, revealed shocking figures regarding the targeting of media professionals by the Israeli occupation. The report held Israel responsible for the deaths of two-thirds of the journalists who died worldwide in 2025, whose total number reached 129 journalists and media workers.

Despite the Israeli occupation army's repeated denials of deliberately targeting journalists, U.S. military testimonies have raised doubts about the integrity of previous investigations. Retired U.S. Colonel Steve Gabafics stated that Washington deliberately toned down the results of its own investigations into Abu Akleh's case to avoid a political clash with the Israeli government.

In a notable development, a documentary produced by an independent platform succeeded in identifying the Israeli soldier suspected of firing the fatal bullet that killed Shireen. The film, titled 'Who Killed Shireen?', revealed that the soldier is named 'Alon Skaggio,' a member of an elite unit of the occupation army that participated in the Jenin camp operation.

The film's producer, journalist Dion Nissenbaum, explained that Israel made strenuous efforts to conceal the soldier's identity and prevent American investigators from reaching him. Nissenbaum confirmed that Israeli authorities refused to provide the American side with any substantive information or allow an interview with the soldier to hear his testimony about the details of the shooting.

These renewed human rights demands place the current U.S. administration before a real test of the principles of justice and human rights it advocates. The case of Shireen Abu Akleh remains a symbol of the Palestinian journalistic struggle in the face of ongoing violations, amidst international and popular insistence on the necessity of ending the policy of impunity.

Continued impunity sends a dangerous message that journalists can be targeted without accountability.

Tensions between Washington and Tehran escalated suddenly following field violations of the fragile ceasefire agreement between the two parties. Field sources reported that the exchange of accusations regarding responsibility for initiating the escalation opens the door to the possibility of a full-scale military confrontation returning to the region, especially with both sides confirming their readiness to respond.

Iranian forces accused the American side of violating the calm by launching attacks targeting two ships in the Strait of Hormuz, in addition to shelling civilian areas deep in the country's south. Tehran affirmed that it did not stand idly by, but rather responded by directly targeting US Navy military vessels present in the region.

Meanwhile, official Iranian sources reported explosions resounding on the strategic Qeshm Island, located within the Strait of Hormuz, during Thursday night. Reports clarified that these explosions resulted from a direct clash and exchange of fire between Iranian armed forces and what it described as 'the enemy' at Bahman pier.

For his part, US President Donald Trump issued statements confirming that three American destroyers were subjected to an intense Iranian attack with missiles and drones. Trump explained that the warships successfully exited the Strait of Hormuz under fire, noting that American defenses shot down enemy targets with complete ease.

Despite acknowledging the clash, the US President considered that the ceasefire agreement remains politically in effect, and negotiations are ongoing. However, Trump issued a stern warning to Tehran, emphasizing that his country would deliver harsher strikes if the current American offer is not accepted quickly.

Observers believe that this escalation may be an attempt by the American administration to preempt any potential failure in the negotiation process. Estimates indicate that Washington seeks to extract quick concessions by exerting military pressure on the ground, exploiting the state of anticipation prevailing in Tehran's political circles regarding the nature of the upcoming response.

On the ground inside Iran, the governor of Minab stated that the targeting of Hormozgan province and southwestern areas did not result in human casualties. The local official confirmed no injuries among civilians, while assessment committees are still working to evaluate the material damage resulting from the shelling.

In the context of political analysis, informed sources in Tehran pointed to a deep crisis of trust regarding American promises, citing previous experiences. These sources considered that Washington pursues a policy of military escalation simultaneous with the negotiation table to impose its conditions, which the Iranian leadership rejects outright.

Currently, the dispute centers on a security agreement dedicated to securing navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, a path completely separate from the complexities of the nuclear file. Tehran insists on keeping the security of waterways away from any trade-offs related to its nuclear program, considering that linking the two files represents a تجاوزاً للخطوط الحمراء previously agreed upon.

The pace of mutual accusations and military movements in international waters suggests that the region has regained the features of a 'mini-war.' With the continued absence of direct communication channels and reliance on mediators, the possibilities of sliding into a wider confrontation remain, unless the repercussions of the recent Strait of Hormuz clashes are contained.

We will strike Iran with greater force than we did today if it does not quickly agree to the deal offered to it.

Media sources and field investigations have revealed a recurring military pattern adopted by the Israeli occupation army in southern Lebanon, aimed at altering the geographical features of border villages. These operations begin with evacuation warnings and military maps, and conclude with widespread demolition and bulldozing operations that have affected dozens of towns, large parts of which have been reduced to rubble.

Southern Lebanese villages have witnessed massive explosions, with the occupation admitting in reports issued in early April that it used approximately 570 tons of explosives to demolish what it described as 'strategic tunnel networks'. These violent operations were concentrated around the towns of Qantara and Taybeh, in a clear violation of the declared de-escalation efforts during that period.

Field monitoring recorded the occupation issuing seven warnings affecting more than 50 Lebanese towns, with these threats recurring in areas that the Israeli army designated as a 'red zone' on its maps. The occupation follows a fixed mechanism that begins with intimidation through warnings, then drawing military maps, leading to field implementation through comprehensive demolition and bulldozing.

Systematic destruction operations continued to include the villages of Shemaa, Bayada, Bint Jbeil, Khiam, Beit Leif, Naqoura, Houla, and Kfarkila. Official estimates issued by the National Council for Scientific Research in Lebanon confirm that the extent of the destruction exceeded all expectations within short periods, reflecting a desire to make these areas uninhabitable.

According to statistical data, more than 400 homes were destroyed in the first three days of the supposed truce alone, while the total number of completely destroyed residential units in various Lebanese areas reached approximately 18,000 homes. Reports also indicate that more than 32,000 other residential units have been damaged since the outbreak of border clashes last March.

Precise analyses of video clips and satellite images showed that Israeli operations reflect a deliberate geographical expansion rather than random strikes. In the city of Bint Jbeil, sources documented the demolition of about 70 homes at once in mid-April, which led to the erasure of entire neighborhoods from the urban map of the historic city.

Images taken from inside Lebanese cities showed the extent of the destruction that affected vital civilian infrastructure, including schools, government buildings, and mosques. Investigation teams were able to accurately identify the locations of the explosions in the village of Ainata and around Bint Jbeil by matching geographical features visible in the clips broadcast by occupation soldiers.

The attacks were not limited to residential buildings but extended to energy infrastructure and public services, with surveillance cameras recording Israeli bulldozers destroying solar panel clusters in the village of Qouzah. The town of Khiam also suffered a series of extensive destruction operations that heavily targeted its western side.

In a move with symbolic and political implications, the occupation army demolished the stadium of Bint Jbeil, the site where the former Secretary-General of Hezbollah delivered a famous speech in 2000 after the Israeli withdrawal. Observers believe that targeting this specific location comes within the framework of an attempt to erase the visual and political memory of previous Lebanese victories.

Field data indicate that the occupation seeks to replicate the experience of the 'buffer strip' in the Gaza Strip and apply it to southern Lebanon. Analysis of the clips shows that the targeting is concentrated in a border strip extending from the Mediterranean coast in the west to the Syrian border in the east, with a depth of up to 8 kilometers in some areas.

European satellite images from 'Sentinel-2' reinforced this hypothesis, revealing intensive activity by the military engineering units of the occupation army. The images clearly show extensive bulldozing operations aimed at creating a militarily exposed area, devoid of inhabitants and urban features, along the northern border of the occupied territories.

A new development emerged in leaked Israeli maps, where maritime zones and gas fields were included within the operational areas, including areas that had been allocated to Lebanon under the 2022 maritime border demarcation agreement. This indicates that Israeli ambitions extend beyond land borders to include Lebanese economic resources and maritime sovereignty.

The current scene brings to mind the era of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon between 1978 and 2000, where the security zone currently being formed is similar to the former 'security belt'. It appears that the occupation is trying to impose a new field reality that prevents residents from returning to their villages and secures northern settlements through a scorched earth policy.

Finally, the demolition operations have changed the face of vast areas such as Kfarkila, Taybeh, Ayta ash-Shab, and Mays al-Jabal, where entire neighborhoods have been turned into hills of rubble. These systematic operations continue amidst international silence, threatening the loss of rights of thousands of Lebanese families to return to their homes and lands that have been bulldozed and leveled.

The targeting is concentrated on border villages within a strip extending 4 to 8 kilometers deep, in an extension reminiscent of the buffer zone in the Gaza Strip.

The concept of hegemony is a cornerstone in understanding social and political frameworks throughout history, as human relations have never been outside the context of power balances and their resulting characteristics. With the advent of the 21st century, an intellectual challenge emerges in the necessity of redefining hegemony, as continuing to apply old concepts to a different reality leads to erroneous conclusions and costly consequences for nations and societies alike.

In the second millennium, hegemony manifested in its worst forms through expansionist ambitions and colonial movements that adopted the concept of 'protection' as their legitimate cover. The effects of that era still surface in African and Maghreb conflicts, as well as ongoing diplomatic tensions, as seen in Algeria's demands for an apology and compensation from France, which former colonial powers reject for fear of legal and material repercussions.

Attempts at geographical expansion according to the old mentality are now doomed to failure in the current era, regardless of a state's military power or political influence. This analysis applies directly to the statements made by the Israeli Prime Minister regarding the dream of 'Greater Israel,' as such orientations stir regional sensitivities and place their proponents in international and historical isolation, as they swim against the current of global civilizational development.

Dominance was not limited to international conflicts but extended to relations between genders through what is known as male hegemony, which prevailed for many centuries. In the first quarter of the current century, we observe a rise in feminist movements and associations advocating for equality, reflecting a global desire to dismantle traditional manifestations of hegemony and replace them with values of justice and the rejection of gender-based discrimination.

The compass in the third millennium points towards 'utilitarian hegemony,' where power is no longer measured by land area but by human and economic development indicators. The dominant state today is one that succeeds in eradicating poverty and unemployment and possesses a strong trade balance that removes it from the cycle of deficit and dependence, making citizen welfare the true measure of influence and sovereignty in the new international system.

The modern concept of hegemony is linked to the extent of states' ability to uphold the values of citizenship and coexistence, and to provide a safe environment that ensures human dignity and stability. In light of the digital revolution and accelerating climate challenges, the ambitious state becomes one that controls problems preventing happiness, transforming the concept of power from tools of military oppression to tools of technological and social construction.

In conclusion, it can be said that hegemony is a constantly changing mechanism that adopts new guises suitable for the spirit of the age and its current requirements. Political intelligence lies in capturing these transformations and avoiding adherence to outdated models that history has proven ineffective. True hegemony in the 21st century is a special kind of 'Bonapartism,' based on science, technology, and achieving a high quality of life for people.

A state that still believes in hegemony in the traditional colonial sense is merely wasting time, money, and resources and falling behind the third millennium.

The Kingdom of Bahrain and the United States of America have submitted a new draft resolution to the UN Security Council, aimed at addressing the escalating crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. The proposal directly calls on Tehran to immediately cease all attacks and threats targeting international navigation and trade in this strategic waterway.

This diplomatic move comes after Iranian authorities closed the strait early last March, a step that followed widespread military confrontations on February 28. This closure represents a direct threat to one of the world's most vital energy arteries, on which international markets critically depend.

The Permanent Representative of Bahrain to the United Nations, Jamal Al Ruwaiei, affirmed that the draft resolution enjoys broad support from countries in the region, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait. Al Ruwaiei explained in press statements that securing the strait is an utmost necessity not only for the stability of the Gulf states but also to ensure the safety of the global economy and avoid financial collapses.

The Bahraini diplomat stressed that recent field developments have proven the urgent need to keep the strategic passage fully open and secure for ship traffic. He indicated that the draft resolution seeks to enhance international collective action to confront security challenges that hinder the flow of essential goods and energy resources to various continents of the world.

The new proposal is based on the previous Security Council Resolution 2817, which earlier condemned Iranian attacks on countries in the region and demanded their immediate cessation. That resolution was approved by 13 member states of the Council, while Russia and China chose to abstain from voting at that time.

The current proposal includes explicit provisions demanding a halt to naval mine-laying operations that threaten commercial vessels and giant oil tankers. The text also addresses the rejection of imposing any illegal fees or arbitrary restrictions on navigation, considering them a blatant violation of international laws and norms governing the seas.

Among the humanitarian aspects of the draft resolution is the call for participation in UN efforts to establish a safe humanitarian corridor within the Strait of Hormuz to facilitate the movement of essential supplies. This provision is guided by the internationally guaranteed principle of freedom of navigation, to ensure that civilians and basic needs are not affected by the ongoing military conflicts in the region.

The Bahraini mission expressed its aspiration for constructive work with all members of the Security Council in the coming days to finalize the drafting of the resolution. This move aims to mobilize the greatest possible international support to ensure the implementation of the provisions and achieve a real breakthrough in the international navigation crisis.

In a related context, the Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar to the United Nations, Alia Ahmed Al Thani, affirmed that the continued closure of the strait has had devastating economic consequences. She explained in a joint media briefing with representatives of Gulf and American countries that the damage has affected all GCC countries and extended to global markets without exception.

The Qatari representative warned that the transformation of the crisis from its regional scope to a global crisis has become a tangible reality due to the strait's close link to logistical supply chains. She pointed out that the global energy sector is experiencing a state of severe confusion as a result of the disruption of export and re-export operations from this sensitive region.

Diplomatic reports revealed that approximately 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade has been disrupted as a result of recent Iranian measures. This disruption has led to sharp price fluctuations and a breakdown in supply networks, putting global energy security at risk amid fears of a long-term economic recession.

Sources indicated the existence of a silent humanitarian crisis, with more than 20,000 sailors stranded at sea due to the halt in navigation. The powers signing the draft resolution considered this situation a real threat to international peace and security, necessitating immediate and decisive intervention by the Security Council to enforce legal order in the strait.

The Strait of Hormuz is important not only for the stability and prosperity of the Gulf region but for the entire global economy, and recent developments underscore the need for collective action.

US President Donald Trump confirmed that three US Navy destroyers successfully crossed the Strait of Hormuz, despite being subjected to a direct attack by Iranian forces. Trump clarified that the American ships sustained no damage, while the attacking force suffered heavy losses in lives and equipment during the engagement.

In a post on his 'Truth Social' platform, Trump described the details of the confrontation, noting that the destroyers crossed the strait under a barrage of heavy fire. He added that US forces managed to completely destroy the attacking Iranian ships, in addition to sinking a number of speedboats that attempted to intercept the American naval vessels.

The US President indicated that the destroyers' defensive systems easily shot down missiles and drones launched by Iran towards the ships. He mentioned that the Iranian drones burned in the air before falling into the sea, emphasizing that the United States possesses superior military technology capable of repelling any threat.

In statements to international media, Trump considered the attacks carried out by Washington in response to Iranian provocations to be merely a 'light strike' so far. Despite this escalation, he affirmed that the ceasefire agreement concluded between the two parties officially remains in effect, calling on Tehran to quickly sign a final agreement.

For its part, the Central Operations Room of the Iranian Armed Forces, 'Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters,' accused the United States of a blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement. Iranian sources said that US forces targeted an oil tanker and a commercial ship while they were crossing the strait, which necessitated a direct military response from their side.

Iranian reports indicated that air raids targeted civilian areas in the south of the country, specifically in Bandar Khamir, Sirik, and Qeshm Island. The sources confirmed that these strikes were carried out in cooperation with some countries in the region, leading to a state of military alert on the Iranian coasts overlooking the Gulf.

In contrast, the US military announced counter-strikes targeting vital Iranian military facilities in response to what it described as unjustified hostile acts. The targets included missile and drone launch sites, as well as command, control, and intelligence centers that were overseeing operations in the strait.

Trump threatened Iran with a 'bigger' and harsher strike if it did not back down from its hostile behavior and adhere to international agreements. He explained that the three destroyers that crossed the strait would join the US forces stationed there, forming what he described as a 'steel wall' as part of the naval blockade plan imposed on Tehran.

Qeshm Island witnessed violent explosions, especially at Bahman Pier, during the intense exchange of fire between the two sides on Thursday night. The US Central Command confirmed that it had eliminated all incoming threats that attempted to target the destroyers during their routine journey through the international waterway.

Trump concluded his statements by emphasizing that Iran will never be given the opportunity to possess nuclear weapons, considering that its current behavior proves that it is 'not a normal country.' He warned that the United States would confront any future aggression with double force to ensure the security of international navigation and protect its interests in the region.

A normal country would have allowed these destroyers to pass, but Iran is not a normal country, and if they had the chance to use a nuclear weapon, they would do so without hesitation.

Global shipping is experiencing an unprecedented crisis with the continued closure of the vital Strait of Hormuz, as international reports confirm approximately 1500 ships remain stranded in Gulf waters. This crisis has caused severe disruptions in global energy markets, leading to successive jumps in fuel prices due to the halt in supply flow through this strategic passage.

The International Maritime Organization reported that the imposed shipping blockade has led to a near-complete paralysis in the movement of tankers that secure about 20% of the world's oil and gas needs. These field developments are a direct reflection of the war that erupted on February 28, making commercial navigation vulnerable to geopolitical conflicts.

In official statements, the Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization, Arsenio Dominguez, revealed the extent of the humanitarian and logistical tragedy, noting the presence of about 20,000 seafarers trapped on board the stranded ships. Dominguez stressed that these crews perform vital tasks for the global economy, but they found themselves victims of complex political and military circumstances.

The international official explained that the maritime shipping sector represents the backbone of global trade, transporting more than 80% of consumed products. He warned that the continued disruption of passage through Hormuz threatens global supply chains in a way that may not be recoverable soon, especially with rising insurance costs and security risks facing tankers.

On the political front, US movements showed clear fluctuations, as President Donald Trump announced a plan for a naval operation aimed at escorting besieged ships and forcibly reopening the strait. However, Washington quickly backed down from this decision by suspending the operation, awaiting the outcome of diplomatic communications regarding proposals to end the war.

In an attempt to circumvent the blockade, shipping sources observed some LNG tankers resorting to concealment by turning off tracking and transmission devices while crossing the strait. According to data from the specialized company 'Kpler', five crossings by gas tankers were recorded in the past two weeks using this method to avoid targeting or detection.

Analyst Laura Page indicated that ship operators are exercising extreme caution given the enormous financial value of gas tankers and the limited global fleet available. This caution has led many companies to completely suspend their voyages or take long and costly alternative routes, exacerbating the energy crisis in consumer markets.

According to shipping records, the vessel 'Sohar' was the only one that risked crossing the strait between early March and late April, passing completely empty. By the end of April, some tankers associated with the UAE began attempts to cross loaded with cargo, taking advantage of periods of cautious calm or technical camouflage.

Among the ships that successfully crossed were the tankers 'Mubaraz' and 'Marwa', with navigation tracking data showing them turning off their broadcasting devices before entering dangerous areas. These ships reactivated their devices after long distances off the Indian coast or when approaching the Strait of Malacca, a clear indication of the extent of security risks in the Gulf.

Data from 'Bloomberg' and 'Global Fishing Watch' indicate that the tanker 'Mubaraz' had loaded its cargo from Das Island, UAE, before disappearing from radars for weeks. This pattern of 'grey' navigation has become the only option available to ensure some gas supplies reach major markets in China, Japan, and India.

In a dangerous field development, Chinese media sources reported that a Beijing-affiliated oil product tanker was subjected to an armed attack near the Strait of Hormuz early this month. This attack is the first of its kind to directly target a Chinese vessel, adding a new international dimension to the ongoing conflict and further complicating the maritime security landscape.

The attack on the Chinese tanker coincided with the confusion in the American position regarding navigation protection, as the incident occurred on the same day that Trump announced his military plan before retracting it. This security vacuum encouraged the escalation of hostile operations against commercial vessels, making the Strait of Hormuz a high-risk area globally.

International circles are currently awaiting the Iranian response to the proposed initiatives, amid fears that any further escalation could lead to a permanent closure of the strait. Informed sources confirm that ongoing negotiations primarily focus on ensuring a safe passage for stranded ships as a first step to build trust between the warring parties.

Amid this stalemate, other tankers such as 'Al Hamra' and 'Marigold' remain stranded inside the Gulf after their navigation signals were disrupted days ago. The fate of thousands of seafarers and the global economy remains dependent on the success of diplomatic efforts to defuse the crisis and reopen the world's most important energy artery.

We have about 20,000 crew members and about 1500 ships trapped due to geopolitical situations beyond their control.

The Spanish capital, Madrid, has witnessed intense diplomatic moves reflecting the depth of the crisis with Tel Aviv, as Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced the awarding of the Civil Order of Merit to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese. This high honor comes in recognition of her continuous efforts to document Israeli violations in the Gaza Strip, despite the international pressures and sanctions she faces.

In a parallel escalatory step, the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Israeli Chargé d'Affaires in Madrid to convey a formal and strongly worded protest. This move followed the Israeli authorities' decision to extend the detention of Spanish activist Saif Abu Kishk, who was among those participating in the 'Freedom Flotilla' aiming to break the siege on the Gaza Strip and deliver humanitarian aid.

Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares affirmed before Parliament that his country considers the continued detention of its citizen 'unacceptable and intolerable'. He clarified that Madrid is following with concern the conditions of detention of Abu Kishk and his Brazilian colleague Thiago Ávila, emphasizing the need to respect international laws related to freedom of navigation and the protection of humanitarian activists.

Israeli forces had intercepted the Freedom Flotilla ships, which set sail with more than 50 vessels from various European ports, in international waters off the Greek island of Crete. Sources indicated that the arrest operation took place hundreds of kilometers from the Israeli coast, raising legal questions about the legality of the military operation on the high seas.

For its part, the 'Global Freedom Flotilla' described in an official statement the continued detention of the activists as 'illegal' and a violation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The statement clarified that the ship they were on was flying the Italian flag, placing it under Italian jurisdiction, which also prompted Rome to express its condemnation of the Israeli operation.

Israel faces accusations of practicing 'psychological abuse and ill-treatment' against the detained activists, according to what was reported by the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights (Adalah). Reports indicated that Abu Kishk and Ávila went on a hunger strike in protest of their isolation and deprivation of sleep through intense lighting in their cells around the clock.

Regarding the honoring of Albanese, the Spanish Prime Minister's office confirmed that the order reflects Madrid's support for international justice and independent human rights work. Albanese is one of the most prominent international voices who has described Israeli military operations in Gaza as 'genocide', which has exposed her to sharp criticism from Washington and Tel Aviv.

Pedro Sánchez called on the European Commission to activate the legal 'disabling mechanism' to protect UN officials from US sanctions. US President Donald Trump had imposed sanctions on officials in international bodies, including Albanese in July 2025, in response to her reports condemning Israeli policies.

The roots of the Civil Order of Merit awarded to Albanese date back to 1926, when it is granted to individuals who provide exceptional services to the state or the international community. The awarding of this order to a UN official attacked by Israel represents a clear political message from the Sánchez government about its commitment to recognizing the Palestinian state.

Israeli authorities accuse the detained activists of being linked to the 'Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad', an organization that Tel Aviv and Washington claim works for the Hamas movement. However, the legal defense for the activists confirmed that these accusations are based on 'secret evidence' that lawyers are not allowed to view or challenge its validity.

Human rights organizations warned of the deteriorating health of the activists, especially with one of them starting a dry hunger strike, which could lead to organ failure within hours. These organizations called on the international community to intervene immediately to ensure their unconditional release, emphasizing that 'humanitarian solidarity is not a crime'.

Diplomatic relations between Madrid and Tel Aviv have been in a state of stagnation since Israel withdrew its ambassador in 2024, in protest of Spain's pro-Palestinian stance. Israeli diplomatic representation in Spain has since been limited to the level of Chargé d'Affaires, amidst sharp reciprocal statements between the two sides.

It is worth noting that Francesca Albanese has held her position as Special Rapporteur since May 2022, an independent position whose holder does not receive a salary from the United Nations. She has faced repeated Israeli attempts to prevent the extension of her mandate, but she has continued to perform her duties with the support of several European and Latin American countries.

This latest development in Madrid reflects a shift in European policy towards the conflict, as some capitals have begun to take practical steps to counter Israeli and American pressures. The issue of the Freedom Flotilla and the detained activists remains a new test of the European diplomacy's ability to protect its citizens involved in humanitarian work.

It is unacceptable and intolerable to extend the detention of our citizen, and we have informed the Israeli side of our official protest against these measures.

Egyptian citizen Mohamed Suleiman, 46, pleaded guilty to all charges against him before a Colorado state court, following his execution of an incendiary bottle attack targeting a pro-Israel gathering in Boulder last year. This confession came during a public session on Thursday, where the judge read dozens of criminal charges Suleiman faced through an Arabic interpreter.

The details of the incident date back to early June 2025, when Suleiman threw incendiary 'Molotov' cocktails at participants in a march aimed at highlighting the issue of Israeli prisoners in the Gaza Strip. The attack resulted in the death of an eighty-year-old woman named Karen Diamond from her injuries, in addition to at least 12 other people suffering burns and injuries of varying severity.

The Egyptian defendant faces a long list of charges totaling 184 criminal counts, most notably first-degree murder according to multiple legal classifications, attempted murder, and armed assault. With this guilty plea, Suleiman now faces a life sentence without any possibility of parole, which ends the litigation process in the state court before the official verdict is issued.

In addition to local cases, Suleiman still faces separate legal prosecution in a federal court on charges related to hate crimes, charges that can carry a penalty of death or life imprisonment under American law. The defendant appeared in the courtroom in prison uniform, listening to the testimonies of survivors who described the difficult moments they experienced and the ongoing psychological repercussions of the attack on them.

Judicial sources reported that investigations revealed prior and precise planning by Suleiman to carry out the operation, as he confessed to investigators that he waited a full year until his daughter graduated from high school before committing his act. Prosecutors confirmed that the defendant directly aimed to target those he described as 'Zionists' to express his anger at the ongoing events in the Palestinian territories.

According to court records, Suleiman used two Molotov cocktails and a makeshift burner made from a herbicide spray can to increase the effectiveness of the fire in his attack. Reports indicated that the defendant was chanting 'Free Palestine' as the fire ignited in the crowd, which strengthened the prosecution's direction towards classifying the crime as a hate crime driven by political and racial motives.

US authorities identified 29 people directly affected by the attack, including 14 people who sustained direct physical injuries while trying to flee the scene. The prosecution considered that the rest of those in the immediate vicinity of the explosions were potential targets for the attempted murders carried out by the defendant using explosive and incendiary materials.

Federal investigations revealed that Suleiman learned how to make incendiary bombs through online platforms and YouTube videos. The defendant explained in his confessions that he resorted to this type of primitive weapon due to strict legal restrictions that prevent immigrants from owning or purchasing firearms in the United States, despite having received prior shooting training.

FBI statements indicated that the defendant meticulously followed how to assemble incendiary devices to ensure maximum damage. Evidence presented to the court included explicit confessions from Suleiman about his desire to draw global attention to what is happening in Gaza by carrying out a retaliatory act within US territory targeting supporters of the occupation.

This trial comes at a time when the United States is experiencing extreme polarization and security tension related to the ongoing Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip. Sources mentioned that this attack followed other similar incidents, including a shooting targeting employees at the Israeli embassy in Washington, reflecting the escalating public anger at US policies supporting Israel.

During the last session, the court heard emotional testimonies from the victims, most of whom confirmed that the effects of the trauma still haunt them nearly 11 months after the incident. Survivors described how the peaceful march turned into a scene of fire and chaos in a matter of moments, demanding the maximum penalties for the defendant to ensure that such acts are not repeated.

The court is scheduled to set a final date for the official verdict after completing all legal procedures followed in first-degree murder cases. Observers are awaiting the outcome of the parallel federal trial, which will determine whether Suleiman will face a lethal injection or spend the rest of his life behind bars in federal prisons.

I want to kill all Zionists, and I planned this attack for a full year until my daughter finished high school.

Health authorities in the Gaza Strip have issued severe warnings regarding the accelerating collapse of the medical system, confirming that 86% of essential laboratory test materials are completely unavailable. This acute shortage has led to a near-complete halt of vital diagnostic services, putting the lives of thousands of injured and sick people at risk amid the ongoing strict Israeli siege and the cessation of medical supply flow through the crossings.

Medical sources explained that the shortage is no longer limited to luxuries, but has extended to routine and emergency tests such as comprehensive blood tests, and the detection of infectious and chronic diseases. The sources indicated that the absence of these tests means the doctor loses their treatment compass, as accurate medical decisions cannot be made without laboratory results clarifying the patient's condition and their response to available medications.

At Al-Shifa Medical Complex in Gaza City, medical analysis specialist Rania Al-Helou confirmed that the situation is worsening daily with no signs of an imminent breakthrough. She mentioned that laboratories suffer from a complete deficit in providing blood gas and electrolyte tests and cardiac enzymes, which are elements that intensive care or heart patients cannot survive without regular and accurate monitoring.

This catastrophic crisis's impact extends to the most vulnerable groups, primarily kidney dialysis and cancer patients who require close monitoring. According to medical staff, many cases have begun to deteriorate rapidly due to the inability to perform tests that determine chemotherapy protocols or necessary dialysis doses.

For their part, patients in Gaza expressed their despair at the bitter health reality, with one cancer patient stating that she has not been able to undergo any laboratory test for three consecutive months. This tragedy is repeated with hundreds of patients who visit hospitals only to find that potassium, phosphorus, and blood test materials are completely missing, rendering their doctor visits effectively futile.

Field reports indicate that the chances of survival for patients in the Strip are diminishing with every passing hour without the entry of medical supplies, as hospitals have turned into shelters rather than treatment centers. This health crisis is part of the repercussions of the ongoing comprehensive war since October 7th, which has directly and systematically targeted the health sector's infrastructure.

In light of this reality, the Ministry of Health continues to appeal to international and humanitarian organizations for immediate intervention to save what remains of the laboratory system. Specialists warn that the continued loss of test materials will lead to a sharp increase in mortality rates among chronic disease patients, who now face death not only due to illness but due to the absence of simple diagnostic tools.

We are losing patients' lives due to our complete inability to monitor their clinical conditions because of the depletion of the simplest laboratory test materials.

Confidential US intelligence reports indicate that Iran possesses the ability to withstand economically and militarily for several months to come, despite the strict naval blockade imposed by the United States on the Strait of Hormuz. This assessment raises major questions about the effectiveness of the maximum pressure strategy pursued by US President Donald Trump against the regime in Tehran.

Informed sources, citing intelligence documents presented to US administration officials this week, reported that Tehran is capable of absorbing the repercussions of the blockade for a period ranging from three to four months. The reports clarified that the severe economic crisis that Washington is banking on may not materialize immediately as expected in political circles.

The field data contained in the assessment indicates a clear gap between military reality and the optimistic statements from the White House. While President Trump asserts the erosion of Iranian capabilities, intelligence agencies believe that Tehran still retains military strengths that have not been decisively affected by recent airstrikes.

According to responsible sources, Iran still controls about 75% of its mobile missile launch platforms, which are military assets difficult to target with high precision. Estimates also indicate that Iran's missile inventory still retains 70% of its strength compared to before the outbreak of direct military confrontations.

The reports revealed intensive activity by Iranian technical units that succeeded in reopening most of the fortified underground weapons depots. These units are working to repair partially damaged missiles, in addition to assembling new systems that were in the final stages of manufacturing before the start of military operations.

In contrast, President Donald Trump adopts a completely different narrative, having recently stated that Iran's missile capabilities have undergone a comprehensive destruction process. Trump claimed that what remains with Tehran does not exceed 19% of its previous arsenal, considering that Iran's deterrent power has reached its lowest historical levels.

This discrepancy in estimates reflects an internal disagreement within the US administration regarding the effectiveness of the military option and the naval blockade. While the political wing believes that pressure is yielding results quickly, technical reports warn that the Iranian regime has shown unexpected resilience in dealing with harsh conditions.

On the other hand, a senior intelligence official confirmed that the blockade has already begun to reduce the Iranian state's financial revenues and accelerate the pace of economic collapse in some sectors. He pointed out that the Iranian naval forces suffered heavy losses in lives and equipment, which led military leaders to withdraw from public view.

Despite these losses, US officials believe that the leadership in Tehran is showing increasing intransigence and confidence in its ability to overcome this critical phase. These officials believe that the regime is willing to sacrifice the living stability of civilians in order to preserve the military and political power structure of the state.

These developments come amid unprecedented regional tension that began since the joint US and Israeli strikes last February. Tehran responded then by targeting the interests of Washington's allies in the Gulf region, leading to its strategic decision to close the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation.

On the diplomatic front, Pakistani mediation in Islamabad failed to reach a sustainable agreement to end the state of blockade. Despite the announcement of a temporary truce last April, the stubbornness of positions prevented its transformation into a permanent peace agreement guaranteeing freedom of navigation in the vital waterway.

It is worth noting that the United States has imposed a full naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz since mid-April, under the pretext of 'restoring freedom of navigation.' President Trump recently announced the continuation of this blockade at full strength, with the suspension of some political projects related to the region until further notice.

Iran can withstand the consequences of the blockade for at least three to four months before entering a severe crisis.

By: Said Arikat

May 8, 2026

News analysis

Washington, D.C- The decision by Park East Synagogue to host the so-called “Great Israeli Real Estate Event” on May 5, 2026, was not a neutral act of community engagement or cultural outreach. It was a political act — one that placed a respected religious institution in direct alignment with the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements built on occupied Palestinian land. No amount of public relations language about “real estate opportunities” or “relocation assistance” can conceal the ugly reality beneath the polished brochures and luxury advertisements: this was an event connected to the commercialization of occupation and the normalization of dispossession.

At a moment when the occupied West Bank is witnessing some of the worst settler violence in decades, the spectacle of property companies marketing homes in settlements to wealthy buyers in Manhattan should shock the conscience. Palestinian communities across the West Bank face escalating attacks from extremist settlers who burn homes, uproot olive groves, terrorize villages, and assault civilians under the protection — or deliberate indifference — of Israeli military forces. Entire families live under constant threat while their land is steadily carved apart by settlements that much of the world considers illegal under international law.

Against this backdrop, hosting a settlement-linked property expo inside a synagogue is not merely controversial. It is morally grotesque.

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani was entirely justified in condemning the event. His criticism reflected a basic moral truth too many American politicians are afraid to voice clearly: settlement expansion is not an unfortunate side issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is one of the central engines driving Palestinian displacement, apartheid-like segregation, and endless violence. Every new housing unit marketed in settlements deepens the architecture of occupation while making any viable Palestinian future increasingly impossible.

The companies showcased at the event were not simply selling apartments. They were selling participation in a project of territorial conquest.

The presence of promotional material for settlements such as Karnei Shomron and Kfar Eldad exposes the deeper ideological nature of these gatherings. These are not random suburban developments. They exist on occupied land seized through military domination and maintained through a legal system that grants rights and privileges to Jewish settlers while subjecting Palestinians to military rule, checkpoints, land confiscation, and systematic restrictions on movement and political life.

To market such properties in New York City — and to do so from within a religious institution — reveals the extraordinary level of impunity surrounding Israeli settlement expansion in the United States.

A synagogue is supposed to represent moral reflection, spiritual responsibility, and human dignity. But when a house of worship opens its doors to companies profiting from occupation, it risks transforming itself into something far darker: a political instrument laundering injustice through religious legitimacy. The issue is not Judaism. Many Jewish organizations and Jewish human rights advocates have fiercely opposed settlements for decades. The issue is the corruption of religious space into a venue for legitimizing dispossession.

No religious institution should be shielded from criticism when it becomes complicit in oppression.

Indeed, if any church, mosque, or temple hosted a commercial fair promoting property sales on land occupied in violation of international law elsewhere in the world, public condemnation would be immediate and ferocious. American media and politicians would denounce it as extremist and morally indefensible. Yet when Palestinians are the victims, a stunning double standard emerges. Occupation becomes “disputed territory.” Ethnic displacement becomes “development.” Illegal settlements become “neighborhoods.”

Language itself is manipulated to obscure brutality.

The defenders of these expos frequently invoke religious freedom and free speech as though either principle grants immunity from accountability. It does not. Freedom of worship does not include the right to facilitate or normalize internationally condemned land seizures without public criticism. A synagogue is not above scrutiny simply because it is a religious institution. Once it enters the arena of overt political activity — especially activity tied to occupation and discrimination — it becomes fully subject to moral and civic judgment.

And judgment is precisely what is required.

The violence of extremist settlers in the West Bank is no longer fringe behavior ignored by Israeli authorities. Increasingly, it operates as an unofficial arm of state policy. Armed settler militias attack Palestinian towns while political leaders in Israel openly advocate annexation and permanent domination over Palestinian land. Human rights organizations, including Israeli groups, have documented patterns of collective punishment, racial segregation, forced displacement, and systemic impunity. Settlement expansion is not separate from this violence; it is its geographic expression.

Events like the Park East expo help sustain that machinery from abroad. They provide financial lifelines, ideological reinforcement, and international normalization for a project rooted in inequality and coercion.

That is why protests outside the synagogue were not acts of intolerance. They were acts of moral resistance.

Attempts by some politicians and pro-settlement activists to portray demonstrators as threats to religious liberty are deeply cynical. Criticizing a synagogue for hosting settlement-linked events is not antisemitic. Opposing occupation is not hatred of Jews. Conflating the two cheapens the fight against real antisemitism while silencing legitimate dissent against Israeli government policies.

In fact, one of the gravest dangers to Jewish ethical tradition comes not from protesters, but from institutions willing to align themselves with permanent occupation and ethno-national supremacy while claiming moral exemption from criticism.

Religious institutions should comfort the oppressed, not profit from their dispossession.

Park East Synagogue insists it acted within its legal rights in hosting the event. That may well be true. But legality has never been the final measure of justice. Throughout history, institutions have invoked the protection of the law while enabling systems of dispossession, exclusion, and human suffering. The real issue is not whether the event was technically permissible, but whether a place that claims moral and spiritual authority should transform itself into a platform for marketing settlements built on confiscated land, entrenched segregation, and the daily violence inflicted on Palestinian civilians.

The answer must be unequivocal: no. No religious institution should cloak occupation and colonization in the language of faith, philanthropy, or community development. The moment a sacred space becomes a commercial venue for the expansion of illegal settlements, it ceases to stand above politics and instead becomes complicit in the machinery of oppression it seeks to sanitize.

The American political scene is witnessing a fundamental shift in the nature of its stance on the strategic alliance with the Israeli occupation state, as the issue has moved from being a bipartisan consensus to a subject of intense debate. Press sources reported that electoral pressures and changing public opinion trends, especially among young people, have prompted many candidates to reconsider their positions on absolute military and political support.

Reports from the 'Washington Post' indicated that the alliance with the occupation has become a political burden in election campaigns, with unusual questions beginning to emerge about the necessity of stopping arms sales. Sources pointed out that recent opinion polls reflect a growing gap within party bases, threatening the traditional unity on foreign policy in the Middle East.

Recent survey data showed that about 72% of Democrats and 47% of Republicans now view support for the occupation as an issue causing internal crises within their parties. This shift comes at a time when candidates from both sides are running their election campaigns based on promises to reduce or end foreign aid directed to the Israeli occupation.

In the Senate, this division was clearly manifested after 40 Democratic members voted in favor of a resolution introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders aimed at preventing arms sales to the occupation. This number represents a significant jump compared to only 27 members who supported a similar measure last July, indicating a growing trend rejecting current policies.

Pro-occupation groups, such as 'AIPAC,' face increasing challenges after their money and support became a political burden for some candidates in crucial states like Michigan. Observers believe that American voters have become more sensitive to foreign interventions and funding associated with pro-Israel lobbying groups.

Sources quoted military surgeon Adam Hamawy, who is running in the Democratic Party primary, as saying that party leaders had not been listening to the true desires of Americans for a long time. Hamawy affirmed that candidates seeking to win in upcoming cycles will be forced to take more critical stances on the occupation in line with the aspirations of their popular bases.

On the Republican side, former President Donald Trump faces pressure from the 'America First' movement, which believes that involvement in Middle East conflicts contradicts national interests. Prominent right-wing voices have begun to express their dissatisfaction with the Israeli lobby's influence on war and peace decisions in the United States, disrupting the party's traditional calculations.

Statistics indicate that negative views towards the occupation have sharply risen among independents to 51%, while jumping among Democrats to 66%. These figures reflect a deep shift in American collective consciousness, where 47% of citizens now believe that Washington exaggerates its support for the occupation beyond reason.

Generational division stands out as one of the most important features of this stage, with young people under the age of fifty holding more radical positions on Israeli policies compared to older generations. In the Republican Party, 57% of young people hold a negative view of the occupation, a percentage that is more than double that of older members in the same party.

Political consultants believe that the traditional pro-Israel base, represented by Republicans over fifty, is no longer a sustainable political alliance in the long term. Experts explained that Democrats have begun to feel greater political security when taking courageous stances condemning Israeli violations in the occupied Palestinian territories.

In Michigan, the intensity of political discourse escalated, with candidates describing what is happening in Gaza as 'genocide,' considering that silence on these crimes makes a politician lose credibility with the public. These candidates affirmed that voters are looking for leaders who have the courage to stand up against injustice and stop illegal wars.

On the other hand, pro-occupation lobbying groups are trying to regain their influence by spending millions of dollars in primary elections to attack candidates opposed to unconditional aid. These groups often resort to using economic or local issues in their advertisements to avoid controversy over their increasingly unpopular stance on Israel.

Even traditional hawks in the Senate, such as Lindsey Graham, have begun to show openness to reviewing the timelines for US military aid. This change in rhetoric reflects a growing realization that the 'blank check' Israel used to receive is no longer acceptable to American taxpayers who demand domestic priorities.

Sources concluded by saying that the old approach based on the principle of 'Israel is always right' has effectively ended in the corridors of American politics. The special relationship is now subject to international law and political accountability, which represents a historic shift that may reshape Washington's role in the region in the coming years.

The special relationship in which questions could not be asked, laws could not be applied, or blank checks to the occupation could not be stopped, has completely ended.

The Ministry of Interior in the Gaza Strip announced today, Thursday, the martyrdom of three of its officers and personnel and the serious injury of a fourth, as a result of an airstrike carried out by Israeli occupation aircraft. The raid directly targeted a guard post belonging to a security headquarters located in the Ansar area west of Gaza City, causing widespread destruction in the area.

The ministry clarified in an official statement that the bombing's victims were not limited to security personnel, but also resulted in the injury of several citizens passing through the area. This military operation comes in the context of a series of attacks targeting security and civilian infrastructure in the besieged Strip.

Medical sources at Al-Shifa Medical Complex confirmed the arrival of the bodies of the three martyrs to the hospital, in addition to a number of wounded suffering from injuries of varying severity. Medical teams in the emergency department are providing necessary first aid to the injured despite severe pressure and lack of resources.

Field reports indicate that this escalation represents a new violation of the ceasefire agreement that came into effect on October 10, 2025. Despite the declared calm, Israeli military operations have not completely ceased, threatening the collapse of existing fragile understandings.

According to statistics issued by the Ministry of Health, the toll of victims of Israeli violations since the start of the agreement has reached approximately 846 martyrs and more than 2,400 injured. These figures show the scale of the challenges faced by the population amidst continued direct targeting and artillery and aerial bombardment.

In a related context, Dr. Muhammad Abu Salmiya, Director-General of Al-Shifa Medical Complex, issued a strong warning about the deteriorating humanitarian and health situation within the Strip. Abu Salmiya described the current conditions as moving from bad to worse, emphasizing that hospitals are no longer able to accommodate the magnitude of the tragedy.

The director of the medical complex revealed that the past twenty-four hours alone witnessed the registration of six martyrs and about 40 injuries, which puts immense pressure on operating rooms and intensive care. He pointed out that the severe shortage of medical supplies now threatens the lives of hundreds of patients and injured daily.

The central pharmacy in Gaza suffers from a deficit exceeding 50% of essential and life-saving medicines, including chemotherapy treatments for cancer patients and dialysis supplies. This severe shortage deprives thousands of patients of their right to treatment and leaves them facing an unknown fate amidst the ongoing siege.

Regarding logistical services, medical sources confirmed the breakdown of the main oxygen station that supplies hospitals in the northern Strip, forcing medical administrations to rely on inadequate alternatives. This breakdown directly threatens the lives of infants in nurseries and patients who depend on artificial respirators.

In addition, the energy crisis stands out as a major obstacle, as power generators have been under continuous work pressure for years without regular maintenance or availability of spare parts. Officials warn of an imminent humanitarian catastrophe if these generators stop due to a lack of fuel and oils necessary for their operation.

Regarding the epidemiological situation, reports noted a widespread انتشار of skin and intestinal diseases among displaced persons in overcrowded camps and shelters. The percentage of skin infections exceeds 80% among the population due to lack of personal hygiene and scarcity of potable water for drinking and human use.

Finally, specialists warned of the emergence of new epidemics such as typhoid and salmonella due to the accumulation of waste and the increasing numbers of rodents and insects in residential areas. The health system in Gaza continues to struggle for survival, amidst international demands for immediate intervention to open crossings and allow urgent medical aid.

The health situation in Gaza is close to complete collapse, and medical teams are working with very limited resources amidst increasing deaths resulting from lack of treatment.

Diplomatic relations between Beijing and Tel Aviv have witnessed escalating tension following an official visit by a delegation of Israeli Knesset members to Taiwan. The delegation included former Knesset Speaker Mickey Levy, along with members from both the coalition and opposition, which sparked widespread anger in Chinese circles that reject any official representation with the island.

Sources reported that the diplomatic clash erupted immediately after the Israeli delegation met with Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te and high-ranking officials in the Taiwanese government. Discussions during the visit focused on enhancing joint cooperation in advanced technology and innovation, which Beijing considered a direct challenge to its sovereignty.

The Chinese Embassy in Tel Aviv issued a strongly worded statement, severely condemning the actions of the Knesset members, describing them as undermining the political foundations upon which joint relations were built. The statement affirmed that this step represents a departure from the international understandings concluded between the two sides regarding the Taiwan issue.

Sources indicated that the Israeli delegation included Boaz Toporovsky, Ron Katz, and Jonathan Mishariki, who conducted field tours and official meetings. The Taiwanese President expressed his happiness with this visit, emphasizing the importance of deepening relations in the fields of artificial intelligence, industrial development, and social cohesion.

For his part, Taiwanese Deputy Foreign Minister Wu Chih-chung affirmed that the arrival of the Israeli delegation amidst the tense security situation in the Middle East reflects significant support for his country. He explained that Taiwan and Israel face similar security and political challenges, which opens broad horizons for deepening strategic cooperation between them.

China's reaction was not limited to verbal condemnation; the Chinese Embassy specifically attacked Knesset member Toporovsky for his repeated statements. Beijing considered that the repetition of these visits constitutes a serious violation of the 'One China' principle, which the Israeli government officially recognizes in its diplomatic charters.

The Chinese Embassy stressed in its statement that there is only one China in the world, and that Taiwan is an inalienable part of its sovereign territory. It added that the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate representative, and that any attempt to circumvent this reality will be met with firm responses.

Beijing accused the Knesset members of cooperating with what it described as 'separatist forces' demanding Taiwan's independence, and inciting conflict across the strait. The statement described these actions as 'despicable acts' aimed at destabilizing regional stability and interfering in China's internal affairs in an unacceptable manner.

The Chinese statement reminded the Israeli government of the joint communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations, which explicitly states Tel Aviv's recognition of China's sovereignty over Taiwan. The embassy considered that the actions of the Knesset members blatantly contradict the official declared position of the Israeli government towards Beijing.

China issued a strong warning to the Knesset members to immediately cease what it described as wrong actions, and not to underestimate China's firm resolve. It affirmed that defending territorial integrity and national sovereignty is a top priority for both the Chinese government and people.

The statement warned against the belief that 'red lines' in the Taiwan issue can be crossed without paying a heavy price on the diplomatic and economic fronts. This threat comes at a time when international relations are witnessing sharp polarization, which puts the Israeli government in an embarrassing position vis-à-vis a huge trading partner like China.

Observers believe that this crisis reflects a state of confusion in Israeli foreign policy, where the actions of parliament members contradict the state's official commitments. Political circles in Tel Aviv fear that this visit could lead to a long-term deterioration in relations with the Asian superpower.

The visit, which focused on technological cooperation and artificial intelligence, has now become a focal point of a political conflict that transcends the boundaries of technology to reach the core of national sovereignty. Taiwan thanked the Knesset for what it described as support in promoting development, a thank you that further angered the authorities in Beijing.

Diplomatic circles are awaiting the official reaction of the Israeli government to the harsh Chinese statement, and whether it will take measures to appease Chinese anger. The Taiwan issue remains the most sensitive test in Tel Aviv's relationship with Beijing, as the latter accepts no leniency on this matter.

These are despicable acts, and we call on Knesset members to immediately cease their wrong words and actions and not to underestimate the resolve of the Chinese people.

The book 'The Iranian-Israeli War: When Will It End?' by Clouds Michael, highlights the dramatic transformations in the Middle East, tracing the roots of hostility since the storming of the Israeli diplomatic mission in Tehran in 1979. The author believes that this date marked the end of the 'Periphery Strategy' adopted by Tel Aviv to build alliances with non-Arab countries, ushering in a phase of building the 'Axis of Resistance' which changed regional power balances.

The hostile relationship evolved into an existential threat with the rise of Hezbollah in Lebanon, which the book described as 'Iran's most powerful weapon,' possessing by 2023 a massive arsenal exceeding 150,000 missiles. This Iranian investment, costing tens of billions, enabled Tehran to create a regional deterrence network capable of depleting Israeli military capabilities at a relatively low cost compared to traditional armies.

The Iranian nuclear file represents the primary driver of the current escalation, especially after the IAEA report in June 2025 revealed that Tehran possessed enough enriched uranium to produce nine nuclear warheads. Strategic sources considered Iran's reaching the 84% enrichment threshold to have put the region on the brink of a comprehensive explosion, as covert sabotage tools were no longer able to curb Iranian nuclear ambitions.

The events of October 2023 marked the breaking point for fragile stability, as the Gaza War activated multiple fronts including Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. Despite attempts by the parties to maintain rules of engagement, the targeting of the Iranian consulate in Damascus and the assassination of prominent leaders such as Ismail Haniyeh and Hassan Nasrallah pushed the confrontation into a phase of direct clash between Tehran and Tel Aviv.

In February 2026, the region entered a phase of open warfare whose repercussions affected the Gulf states and the global financial system, amidst international inability to contain the conflict. This confrontation led to a severe energy crisis due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, putting the global economy to an unprecedented stress test that threatened food security in vast areas of the world.

US President Donald Trump's administration faces increasing internal pressure with his popularity dropping to a third due to rising fuel prices, prompting Washington to seek a diplomatic solution. Sources confirm that intensive communications are currently underway to reach a framework agreement that would end what US officials described as the 'epic rage war' that achieved its initial military objectives.

Tehran demands in any upcoming negotiations a complete lifting of sanctions imposed since 2018, compensation for damages to its infrastructure, and binding security guarantees. In contrast, Tel Aviv insists on the permanent dismantling of Iranian missile and nuclear capabilities, creating a wide gap in the terms of negotiation between the two parties.

The 'long-term war of attrition' scenario is considered the most likely, with a probability of up to 45%, where each party bets on its economic and military resilience against the erosion of the opponent's capabilities. Iran's strategy in this context relies on prolonged resistance, exploiting global economic pressure and political unrest within the United States and Israel.

Analysts warned of a 'nuclear escalation' scenario that could push other regional countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey to seek nuclear weapons, which would completely change the global nuclear order. This shift would transform the Middle East from a region with one undeclared nuclear power into an arena for an overt nuclear arms race, ending traditional deterrence concepts.

Russian and Chinese roles emerged as crucial factors in sustaining Iran's ability to confront, by providing Tehran with advanced air defense systems and electronic warfare technology. Beijing also acts as an economic lifeline by purchasing energy and transferring technology, allowing Iran to continue its attrition strategy without collapsing under the weight of Western sanctions.

The Strait of Hormuz remains Tehran's strongest card, as its continued closure for more than ninety days could push the global economy into a comprehensive recession that major powers cannot afford. Expectations lean towards a 'de facto partial opening' of the strait, through practical arrangements that ensure the passage of commercial vessels without reaching a formal and comprehensive political agreement.

Strategic analysis confirms that any solution that ignores the Palestinian issue will remain temporary, as it is the deepest structural cause that fuels popular and political support for the Axis of Resistance. The continuous displacement and deprivation of Palestinians of their rights provide fertile ground for the growth of resistance movements, making their use as a strategic tool always available to regional powers.

Israel suffers from increasing diplomatic isolation despite its military achievements, as former security leaders believe that the absence of a political horizon threatens the security of the Hebrew state in the long run. The destruction inflicted on the Gaza Strip deepened regional hatred, making it difficult to translate field victories into sustainable political stability in the region.

In conclusion, the conflict of 2025 and 2026 appears to resemble historical wars such as the Korean War in its structural features, where military operations continue due to the absence of a mechanism to translate the field reality into a settlement. The gamble remains on the ability of international institutions and alliances established after World War II to withstand this harsh test.

Any settlement that ignores the Palestinian dimension will not last; military elimination of organizations does not resolve the political conditions that make the emergence of their successors inevitable.

Israeli occupation forces continue to launch raids on various areas in the Gaza Strip, resulting in the death of nine martyrs over the past twenty-four hours, in a field escalation that exceeds the average daily casualties since the ceasefire began. Field sources reported that these targeting operations are heavily concentrated in areas near the border and what is known as the 'Yellow Line,' where the army imposes strict security restrictions preventing the access of relief teams.

The attacks extend to the heart of the Strip and residential neighborhoods, as happened in the Zeitoun neighborhood south of Gaza City, where three members of one family were martyred while trying to set up their tent. These incidents confirm that the supposed calm has not provided safety for the residents, who face the risk of direct targeting whether during their movement or even inside temporary displacement centers.

On the ground, reports indicate that the Israeli army has not adhered to border understandings, but rather has expanded its military control to include additional areas estimated at about 10% of the Strip's area. This expansion has tightened the noose on residents and deprived them of access to their lands and homes, amid serious fears of a return to comprehensive military operations in light of stalled political negotiations.

Regarding the aid file, the occupation authorities continue to ration the entry of relief trucks, with the daily average not exceeding 200 trucks, a figure far below the 600 trucks agreed upon in the first phase. This severe shortage has caused markets to dry up of basic goods, and the fuel and cooking gas crisis continues to plague hundreds of thousands of displaced families.

Statistics indicate that seven out of ten families do not have cooking gas, forcing residents to use alternative and dangerous methods such as burning waste and cardboard to prepare food. This crisis coincides with the occupation's classification of many basic materials, such as wood and solar energy equipment, as 'dual-use items' prohibited from entering the Strip.

The hunger crisis continues to hit hard in various areas of Gaza, with one out of five families unable to secure more than one meal a day. 'Tekkiyat' (charitable kitchens) and charity kitchens have become the only refuge for thousands of Palestinians who have lost their sources of income and their ability to buy scarce and expensive food items.

The suffering of displaced people inside the camps is increasing with rising temperatures and the spread of epidemics and rodents among piles of rubble and accumulated waste. Shocking medical cases have been recorded, including a child suffering from paralysis due to a rodent bite inside his tent, raising alarm bells about the deteriorating health environment in which children and the elderly live.

In addition, the water crisis represents a daily challenge for Palestinians, as the Strip suffers from a severe shortage of potable water and the collapse of sewage networks. Families are forced to travel long distances to obtain limited quantities of water, which is often contaminated, exacerbating the spread of skin and intestinal diseases among the displaced.

Regarding the file of the wounded and sick, Israeli obstacles continue to prevent thousands from traveling abroad for treatment, despite the partial reopening of the Rafah crossing. Sources confirm that the number of daily departures does not exceed 60 people, which is less than half the agreed number, putting the lives of thousands of injured people at real risk.

Estimates indicate that about 20,000 patients and wounded are in urgent need of medical referrals, while only 12% of the target groups have actually been able to travel. This deliberate delay has led to the deaths of a number of cancer and chronic disease patients who waited long and in vain to receive their right to treatment.

For its part, the Ministry of Health in Gaza issued a final warning of a complete collapse in laboratory and pharmaceutical services within the remaining hospitals. The ministry announced the depletion of about 47% of the essential medicines list, in addition to a severe shortage of medical consumables necessary for dialysis, eye surgeries, and cardiac catheterization.

The health statement also clarified that 87% of laboratory testing materials have zero stock, meaning that laboratories have stopped conducting basic tests such as complete blood counts. This shortage directly threatens the ability of doctors to diagnose critical cases and monitor patients in intensive care units and emergency rooms.

Cancer and blood disease treatment sectors and primary care are among the most affected categories, where patients face an unknown fate in the absence of alternative treatments. Medical staff appeal to the international community to intervene immediately to break the medical blockade and bring in necessary supplies before the remaining health facilities cease to operate.

The bitter reality in the Gaza Strip proves that the ceasefire did not end the catastrophe, but rather revealed the depth of the collapse that has affected all aspects of life. While intermittent raids continue, hunger, disease, and siege remain tools that plague the population who await radical solutions to end their ongoing humanitarian suffering for years.

Continuous Israeli targeting significantly exacerbates the humanitarian and living conditions in the Strip, and Palestinians continue to live with the specter of war.

Thousands of families in the Gaza Strip are experiencing a complex humanitarian tragedy, as parents are forced to inject their children with expired insulin doses to save their lives from diabetes. Mothers anxiously monitor the expiration dates printed on the packages, which expired many months ago, amidst bitter questions about whether spoiled medicine is less harmful than death without it.

In Gaza, the battle is no longer limited to displacement and bombing; it has extended to include a silent struggle with chronic diseases that are ravaging the bodies of the young. The case of Amir, a child not yet ten years old, embodies the reality of hundreds of children suffering from deteriorating health due to the absence of effective treatment and a dilapidated living environment.

Local sources confirm that the crisis is not limited to expiration dates but also extends to the efficacy of stored medicine. With continuous power outages, insulin loses its therapeutic ability due to storage at high temperatures, turning it into a liquid with little vital value.

Medical statistics indicate that there are approximately 2,500 children in the Strip suffering from 'Type 1' diabetes, who rely entirely on daily injections to survive. These children face existential challenges that go beyond the disease, including the scarcity of healthy food necessary to control blood sugar levels.

In displacement centers and dilapidated tents, mothers recount painful stories of their inability to provide healthy food to support their exhausted children. Children whose blood sugar levels soar to terrifying levels find only canned goods, which families describe as 'packaged poisons' that further worsen their health.

Nour Al-Safadi, a mother of a child with diabetes, speaks about her daily suffering in the Al-Sahat area in central Gaza City, where her child Majed lacks the most basic necessities of life. In addition to spoiled medicine, the child lacks clean water and vegetables essential for his diet, leaving him confined to the tent, suffering from constant lethargy.

Sources add that the absence of blood sugar monitoring devices and test strips further complicates the situation, as parents are forced to deal with the disease by intuition without accurate knowledge of sugar levels. This reality puts children's lives at stake and makes every dose of medicine an unsafe gamble with unknown consequences.

According to reports issued by the Ministry of Health, between 70,000 and 80,000 diabetic patients in Gaza face a real danger due to the complete collapse of medical follow-up. The report warns that the severe shortage of vital insulin will lead to health catastrophes that cannot be remedied in the near future.

For his part, endocrinology and diabetes consultant Adli Al-Ghouti revealed alarming figures regarding the condition of affected children, confirming that they face a fatal danger. He explained that medicine alone is not enough in the absence of proper nutrition, which is the primary pillar for avoiding acute complications of the disease.

The Palestinian doctor warned that relying on insulin with current malnutrition rates turns children's bodies into a battleground for serious complications. Severe hypoglycemia attacks and sudden death become a lurking danger for every child who cannot find a meal to protect them from the effect of insulin on their empty stomachs.

Al-Ghouti also warned of a technical and fatal dilemma: when insulin loses its coolness or exceeds its expiration date, it completely loses its vital efficacy. This means that the repeated injection pricks that children endure become mere pain without medical benefit, exacerbating their physical and psychological suffering.

Experts point out that using ineffective insulin gives parents a false sense of security, while blood sugar levels remain high. This continuous elevation accelerates the occurrence of 'diabetic ketoacidosis,' an emergency condition that rapidly ravages the body in the absence of qualified hospitals.

International organizations such as the World Health Organization and Human Rights Watch had previously warned in reports that the lack of insulin poses a direct threat to life. These organizations confirmed that the absence of treatment and follow-up exposes patients to fatal complications such as coma, kidney failure, and nerve damage.

Cries are rising from within the Gaza Strip demanding urgent international intervention to bring in medical supplies and vital medicines to save thousands of children. Hope remains dependent on opening crossings and providing safe corridors for medical aid before the 'silent enemy' destroys what remains of these young bodies.

Using expired insulin gives parents a false sense of security, while high sugar levels ravage children's bodies amid the collapse of the medical system.

The city of Hebron, the largest city in the occupied West Bank, is facing a new phase of administrative tightening following the election of Yousef Al-Ja'bari as its mayor, where he found himself stripped of basic powers related to planning and construction. These restrictions are concentrated around the Ibrahimi Mosque, the most sensitive area, after the occupation authorities decided to withdraw these tasks from the Palestinian side and transfer them to Israeli officials unilaterally.

This step comes within the context of a broader policy pursued by Benjamin Netanyahu's government, aimed at strengthening the influence of the settler minority within the heart of Palestinian cities. Observers believe that this shift represents a dramatic acceleration in the gradual annexation operations that have continued for decades, but have now moved from de facto annexation through settlement outposts to legal and official annexation through changes in administrative laws.

Sources reported that the recent changes led by the far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich aim to transfer authority from military rule to Israeli civilian administration. This shift practically means eliminating the need for military approval for land purchases, and granting the Ministry of Justice in the occupation state full control over land registries in most parts of the occupied West Bank.

These legal amendments allow Israeli officials to take direct executive measures, including demolishing properties and intervening in water issues and environmental risks in areas historically managed by the Palestinian Authority. These measures are considered a direct undermining of what remains of the foundations of the Oslo Accords, as they remove the legal barriers that prevented the full annexation of lands.

Data from human rights organizations indicate that the current occupation government has approved the establishment of 102 new settlements in less than four years, which is almost double the number of settlements that existed before it took power. One of the most dangerous of these projects is the 'E1' settlement, which threatens to separate the north of the West Bank from its south, thereby eliminating any chance for the establishment of a contiguous Palestinian state.

In parallel with settlement expansion, the occupation authorities have intensified their economic pressures on the Palestinian Authority, leading Palestinian officials to warn of an imminent financial collapse. Palestinian Finance Minister, Estephan Salameh, stated that the goal of this financial blockade is to create a political and administrative vacuum that facilitates the final annexation of the West Bank amidst a lack of real international pressure.

On the ground, the pace of settler violence has escalated unprecedentedly, with the United Nations documenting over 1800 attacks in the past year alone. These assaults occur in a climate of impunity, leading to the martyrdom of 13 Palestinians since the beginning of this year, including children who were killed by direct settler fire in West Bank villages.

This systematic violence has led to the forced displacement of 36 Palestinian communities entirely over the past three years, in addition to the partial displacement of dozens of other communities. Analysts confirm that the goal of these attacks is to force Palestinians to voluntarily leave their lands to facilitate state control over them and later allocate them for settlement projects.

New administrative changes include funding for re-launching the land registration process in Area 'C', a process that has been halted since 1967. Activists warn that demanding Palestinians to prove ownership of their lands under impossible conditions will automatically lead to the conversion of vast areas of private property into 'state lands' belonging to the occupation.

According to legal experts, the burden of proof in the new laws has shifted to the Palestinian citizen, so any land whose owner cannot prove private ownership immediately goes to the occupation. This new legal system aims to 'normalize' the lives of settlers and make them citizens enjoying all Israeli civil rights over the occupied territories.

Former officials in the occupation's security apparatus expressed their shock at the extent of violence against Palestinian villages, with a former head of Mossad describing what he saw in those villages as reminding him of tragic historical events. Nevertheless, the government continues to provide political and legal cover for these practices aimed at radically changing the demography of the region.

Deep concern prevails in the Palestinian street that these measures are a prelude to mass displacement operations, especially with statements from ministers in the occupation government openly calling for encouraging Palestinian emigration. Activists in Hebron say that the fear of a 'second Nakba' now accompanies residents amidst the absence of international protection and the encroachment of settlers.

Control over land registries and making them public, along with lifting the ban on selling them to non-Arabs, opens the door for settlement companies to acquire strategic areas. These silent administrative steps are considered more dangerous than direct military operations, because they create a legal reality that is difficult to reverse in the future.

Ultimately, the occupation's strategy appears clear in transforming the West Bank into isolated cantons managed by Palestinian municipalities stripped of powers, while the Israeli civilian administration controls resources and land. This system entrenches an administrative 'apartheid' reality that seeks to eliminate any Palestinian national aspirations for independence and sovereignty.

They are creating a municipality within a municipality, stripping us of our powers, and not respecting the agreements they signed.

Political and security circles in Tel Aviv are experiencing a state of anticipation mixed with intense anxiety, following news from Washington about tangible progress in negotiations with Tehran. These fears come amid the American administration's move towards concluding a deal that ends the state of war, which Israel views as a retreat from the maximum pressure goals it had hoped would continue until the collapse of the Iranian regime.

Despite attempts by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reassure the Israeli public by emphasizing continuous coordination with President Donald Trump, leaks indicate a deep gap between the declared war objectives and the expected outcomes. Israeli officials believe that any agreement that does not guarantee a complete dismantling of nuclear and missile capabilities would be a strategic defeat for Tel Aviv.

Sources reported that a number of ministers in the occupation government expressed their dissatisfaction with the circulated draft agreement, considering it not fundamentally different from the 2015 agreement. The core objection lies in the fact that the proposed agreement limits uranium enrichment for a specific period of only 15 years, leaving the door open for Tehran to return to its nuclear ambitions in the future.

For his part, Knesset member Moshe Saada, close to Netanyahu, tried to alleviate these concerns by indicating that Israel would not be bound by any agreement that ties its hands. He explained in radio statements that the current political maneuvers aim to avoid appearing as an obstacle to American efforts, while military operations continue on the ground to impose a new reality.

In a related context, media reports quoted security officials describing the agreement as a 'lifeline' for the Iranian regime, which was suffering from a suffocating siege and increasing internal pressures. These officials believe that lifting sanctions and unfreezing billions will enable Tehran to rearm its proxies in the region, primarily Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.

Intelligence estimates indicate that Iran currently possesses a huge stockpile of enriched uranium, amounting to 11 tons, which poses a significant challenge to any control agreement. Israel fears that parts of this stockpile may have been moved to secret underground facilities untouched by recent airstrikes, making their destruction extremely complex.

On the military front, there is a belief in Tel Aviv that the agreement will inevitably restrict the freedom of action of the Israeli army on the northern front. Former military leaders warn that Washington may pressure for a comprehensive ceasefire that prevents Israel from completing its operations aimed at destroying Hezbollah's infrastructure in southern Lebanon.

In Washington, internal economic and political motives seem to play a decisive role in accelerating the pace of negotiations, especially with Trump's declining popularity and voters' complaints about rising fuel prices. News of the negotiations immediately reflected on global markets, with oil prices falling by more than 10%, giving the American administration an additional incentive to move forward.

The White House also faces legislative pressure, as US law requires the administration to obtain parliamentary approval to continue any military conflict after 60 days of troop involvement. This time constraint pushes Washington to seek a diplomatic solution that ends the 'epic rage war' as some American officials described it, considering that it has achieved its initial objectives.

In return, Tehran stipulates for accepting the agreement a complete lifting of economic sanctions and the lifting of the naval blockade, in addition to restoring access to its frozen funds abroad. These conditions are a red line for the Israeli security establishment, which sees them as a means to strengthen Iran's regional influence and finance new military operations against Israeli interests.

'Sources' reports indicate that Iran still retains thousands of ballistic missiles ready for launch from fortified underground facilities, despite the strikes it has suffered. This reality reinforces Israeli doubts about the effectiveness of any agreement that does not include an explicit clause for the destruction of these missile systems that directly threaten Israeli depth.

Regarding regional proxies, Tel Aviv believes that Hezbollah and the Houthis still possess deadly offensive capabilities, including advanced drones. Israel fears that the agreement will legitimize the presence of these forces as part of new regional arrangements, instead of weakening and undermining their capabilities as planned at the beginning of the confrontation.

Military analyst Giora Eiland believes that any agreement at the present time is a 'bad option' for Israel, which was betting on the collapse of the Iranian regime from within under the weight of the siege. Eiland stressed that the American retreat from the option of military decisive action gives Tehran a golden opportunity to rearrange its political, economic, and military cards away from the pressures of war.

In conclusion, the relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv remains facing a real test in light of the clear divergence of interests regarding the Iranian file. While Washington seeks to calm fronts and secure oil flow, Israel insists that sustainable security can only be achieved by definitively and comprehensively ending the existential threat posed by the Iranian nuclear project.

This agreement is catastrophic for Israel; it entrenches the rule of the clerics in Iran and grants them a lifeline while they were approaching collapse.

American press reports, citing officials in Washington, revealed that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia played a crucial role in thwarting a mission launched by President Donald Trump to open the Strait of Hormuz to ships stranded in the Gulf. Sources explained that tensions began when Trump surprised his regional allies by announcing 'Operation Freedom' via social media platforms, without sufficient prior coordination with the Saudi leadership.

This sudden announcement caused widespread displeasure in Riyadh, which quickly informed the American administration of a firm decision not to allow the US military to launch aircraft from Prince Sultan Air Base. The Saudi decision also included prohibiting flights through the Kingdom's sovereign airspace to support this military operation, which put the American plan in a major logistical predicament.

President Trump attempted to remedy the situation by making a phone call to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, but the talks did not resolve the existing crisis. Based on this intransigence, Trump was forced to announce the temporary suspension of 'Operation Freedom' in an attempt to restore understandings that would ensure the US military's access to vital airspace in the region.

Saudi Arabia was not the only one surprised by the American move, as sources indicate that other Gulf allies, including Qatar, were only contacted after the operation had actually begun. This coordination disarray raised questions about the decision-making mechanism in the White House and the disregard for the political and security sensitivities of allied countries in the Arabian Gulf region.

For his part, a Saudi source confirmed that communication between Trump and the Crown Prince was regular, but noted that matters were evolving very quickly in real-time. The source explained that the Kingdom is currently putting its weight behind diplomatic efforts led by Pakistan, with the aim of reaching a comprehensive agreement between Tehran and Washington that would end the state of war and tension.

In contrast, the White House tried to downplay reports of allies being surprised, with a US official stating that regional partners had been informed in advance of the efforts. However, a Middle Eastern diplomat confirmed that coordination with countries like Oman only occurred after President Trump's official announcement, despite those countries not expressing public anger.

On the ground, the US military was preparing to deploy more naval vessels to Gulf waters to secure passage through the strait before the suspension order was issued. Indeed, US Central Command had earlier announced the successful passage of two US-flagged vessels through the Strait of Hormuz under the umbrella of 'Operation Freedom' before its suspension.

Trump justified the project's suspension in his subsequent posts as an opportunity to complete political negotiations and sign an agreement to end the armed conflict. Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia is considered a strategic center, housing US fighter jets, refueling aircraft, and advanced air defense systems that were designated to support operations against Iran.

US military strategy in the region relies entirely on what is known as 'Access, Basing, and Overflight' (ABO) permissions. Without the consent of host nations, US aircraft find themselves unable to provide the necessary defensive umbrella to protect commercial vessels transiting vital waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz.

Geography plays a crucial role in this conflict, as military officials believe there are no effective alternative routes if Saudi Arabia and Jordan refuse to allow aircraft basing. Kuwait is also an essential country for air transit operations, while Oman's importance stands out in providing maritime logistical services and overflight in areas near the Arabian Sea.

Currently, two US aircraft carrier groups are in the region, with significant reinforcements in logistical capabilities and military stockpiles made by the Department of Defense. 'Operation Freedom' aimed to provide intensive military surveillance and direct firepower, including placing security personnel on board ships to deter ongoing Iranian threats.

Pentagon officials clarified that 'Operation Freedom' differed in nature and objectives from the air bombing campaign launched on February 28 under the name 'Epic Fury'. While the latter focused on striking military targets, the suspended project primarily focused on securing international commercial navigation.

These developments indicate a gap in visions between Washington and Riyadh on how to deal with the Iranian issue at this critical stage. While Trump tends to impose a new military reality through swift operations, Saudi Arabia prefers diplomatic channels that ensure long-term stability away from direct military escalation.

The future of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz remains dependent on the US administration's ability to mend its relations with Gulf allies and convince them of the utility of joint military operations. Amid ongoing threats, the region remains open to all possibilities, whether a return to the negotiating table or a resumption of military operations if regional mediations fail.

Due to geography, the United States needs the cooperation of regional partners to use their airspace along their borders, and in some cases, there is no alternative route.

US authorities have reactivated the deportation process for Palestinian student Mohsen Al-Mahdawi, who is considered a prominent figure in the student movement supporting Palestine within American universities. This step comes within the context of a strict campaign led by President Donald Trump's administration against activists and defenders of Palestinian rights in the United States.

Recent judicial documents revealed that the Board of Immigration Appeals decided to resume legal proceedings against Al-Mahdawi, a student at the prestigious Columbia University. This decision represents a dramatic turn in the case, which has witnessed intense legal and political tug-of-war in recent months.

Immigration Judge Nina Fros had issued a ruling last February rejecting the US administration's attempts to deport the Palestinian student. Her decision at the time came after Al-Mahdawi's arrest last year following his involvement in demonstrations condemning the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip on campus.

However, recent developments saw Judge Fros removed from her position last month, paving the way for the Board of Immigration Appeals to overturn her previous ruling. This board is affiliated with the Executive Office for Immigration Review within the Department of Justice, which gave the green light to continue prosecuting Al-Mahdawi legally.

The Trump administration justifies these harsh measures by describing activists like Al-Mahdawi as 'anti-Semitic' and promoters of 'extremism.' Official circles in Washington consider these protest movements a direct threat to American interests and foreign policy in the Middle East.

In contrast, human rights organizations, including progressive Jewish groups, reject this governmental description and consider it a deliberate conflation. These entities believe that the authorities are seeking to criminalize criticism of Israeli policies and the occupation of Palestinian territories by labeling it as anti-Semitism to intimidate sympathizers.

Mohsen Al-Mahdawi, who was born and raised in a refugee camp in the West Bank, expressed his condemnation of these measures in an official statement. Al-Mahdawi affirmed that the American government is using immigration laws as a political tool to suppress freedom of expression and silence any voice that opposes its pro-occupation stances.

The roots of the crisis date back to April 2025, when Al-Mahdawi was arrested while on his way to a routine interview related to his application for US citizenship. Despite his subsequent release by court order and without criminal charges, his prosecution through immigration laws has continued.

The American Civil Liberties Union is undertaking the legal defense of the Palestinian student, asserting that the deportation process cannot currently be carried out. The Union bases its defense on pending legal challenges before federal courts concerning the legality and legitimacy of the original arrest.

Al-Mahdawi's case falls within a broader strategy pursued by the current administration to undermine student movements supporting Palestine. This strategy includes threatening to cut federal funding to universities that allow protests, as well as imposing strict censorship on the digital activities of immigrants and foreign students.

It is worth noting that American universities have witnessed an unprecedented student uprising since late 2023 in rejection of the war of extermination in Gaza. Despite the decline in the momentum of these protests on the ground, their legal and political repercussions continue to pursue activists, amid international concerns about a decline in academic freedoms in the United States.

The government continues to use immigration laws as a weapon to silence dissenting voices.

Attention is focused on the Turkish capital, which is hosting a fateful meeting bringing together representatives of the Hamas leadership council with mediators from the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Qatar. This intensive diplomatic meeting aims to propose new formulas for implementing the second phase of the ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip, amidst a phase described by observers as the most complex since the start of negotiations due to fundamental differences over the mechanisms for transitioning to sustainable security and political arrangements.

Sources reported that Cairo has presented initiatives aimed at rebuilding trust between the parties, including the necessity of committing to the daily entry of 600 humanitarian aid trucks into all areas of the Strip, along with a comprehensive cessation of military operations and assassinations. The sources clarified that the terms of the second phase are based on the complete withdrawal of occupation forces from Gaza, but Tel Aviv's condition of 'disarmament' before implementation has hindered efforts, especially after the occupation rejected three previous proposals submitted to facilitate the transition between the phases of the agreement.

A high-level delegation from the Hamas leadership council, including Mohammed Darwish, Khalil al-Hayya, Zaher Jabarin, Khaled Meshaal, and Hussam Awadallah, is participating in the Turkey consultations. Mediators link the possibility of achieving a real breakthrough in the crisis to the extent of progress in understandings between Washington and Tehran, as the US administration is expected to give a strong boost to the negotiations if outstanding regional issues are resolved, which could put decisive pressure on the occupation government to adhere to the terms of the first phase and effectively transition to the second phase to prevent the region from sliding into an all-out war.

The second phase stipulates the complete withdrawal of the occupation army from the Strip and the development of a plan to deal with security issues, but the occupation's intransigence is impeding implementation.

In Berlin, which I have been visiting for several days with a media and human rights delegation, the visitor to this sprawling city on the fringes of history sees the remnants of the past, etched in a memory burdened by the genocide perpetrated against the Jews by the Nazis during World War II. Buildings, streets, and walls still bear witness to an era of history, an era in which the plates of geography and demography shifted, and on its fringes, laws were sewn to criminalize anyone who criticizes Israel, even as it violates, confiscates, arrests, tortures, kills, and exterminates tens of thousands of Palestinians—victims of victims.

Despite the high quality of German manufacturing—where the German nail emerges with grace and ends with elegance—German politics bears no resemblance to its industry. It has chosen to remain in the gray area, incapable of upholding the values of the Republic, foremost among them the application of international law at all times and in all places without double standards, so as not to allow the recurrence of crimes against humanity.

There is a gap between the German government and the German people, whose opinion polls indicate their rejection of the government's policies that tolerate Israel's crimes against the Palestinian people. Efforts are underway in the Bundestag to pressure the government to recognize the State of Palestine and to terminate the trade partnership agreement that obligates Israel to adhere to democratic principles and human rights. These polls are not mere numbers; they reflect a movement stirring within the halls of parliament.

The river of freedom will not run dry, and international efforts to alleviate the suffering and wounds of the victims will not cease. A glimmer of light shines through the fire and smoke, for the status quo is unsustainable. 

In Berlin, which I have been visiting for days with a media and human rights delegation, the visitor to the sprawling city on the edge of history sees the protrusions of the past, etched into a memory burdened by the impact of the extermination of Jews by Nazism during World War II, and in buildings, streets, and walls that still bear witness to an era of history, where the plates of geography and demography shifted, and on its sides, laws were sewn to criminalize anyone who criticizes Israel, even if it violated, confiscated, arrested, tortured, killed, and exterminated tens of thousands of Palestinians; victims of victims. 

Despite the high quality of German industry, as the German screw slips gracefully and ends elegantly, German politics does not resemble its industry, as it chose to remain in the gray area, unable to uphold the values of the Republic, foremost among them the application of international laws at all times and in all places without double standards, so that the crimes committed against humanity are not repeated.

There is a gap between the German government and its people, as opinion polls indicate their rejection of their government's policies that tolerate the crimes committed by Israel against the Palestinian people. 

There are efforts being made in the "Bundestag" aimed at compelling the government to recognize the Palestinian state and to dissolve the trade partnership agreement that obliges Israel to adhere to the rules of democracy and human rights. Polls are not just numbers, but a movement that infiltrates the corridors of parliament.The river of freedom will not dry up, and international efforts to rescue victims from their pain and bleeding wounds will not cease, for there is a light flickering from among the pillars of fire and smoke, for the status quo is impossible.

The international arena witnessed a dramatic shift following US President Donald Trump's announcement to freeze 'Operation Freedom,' which aimed to forcibly break Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. This decision was made via the 'Truth Social' platform, where Trump indicated his desire to give diplomatic solutions a chance, reflecting a clear retreat from the threatening rhetoric that prevailed in recent weeks.

Informed sources reported extensive behind-the-scenes contacts between American and Iranian officials to reach a comprehensive 'agreement of principles.' This proposed agreement aims to address the causes and consequences of the conflict, ensuring an end to hostilities and the restoration of stability in vital international shipping lanes.

Global markets reacted immediately to this news, with oil prices recording a sharp drop exceeding 10% within a few hours. Observers considered this decline to reflect market optimism about the disappearance of the specter of a full-scale military confrontation that threatened global energy supplies.

For its part, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard announced that safe and stable passage through the Strait of Hormuz would become possible under the new measures and the disappearance of threats from external powers. These statements confirm the existence of a climate of mutual de-escalation that paves the way for negotiation away from the language of warships.

The official tone in Washington has changed significantly, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating that what he described as a war of 'epic rage' has ended after achieving its strategic objectives. Rubio affirmed that US forces in the Gulf region have now shifted to a 'defensive posture,' which represents a departure from the pre-emptive strike strategy.

For his part, President Trump softened his rhetoric, avoiding the use of terms like 'total war' and replacing them with expressions such as 'small war' or 'limited conflict.' Trump expressed unprecedented optimism about the possibility of reaching a historic settlement with the Iranian leadership that would end the nuclear crisis and ensure freedom of navigation.

In a related context, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth affirmed that the US administration is not seeking to fight at present, emphasizing that the military phase has exhausted its purposes. These statements reflect a consensus within the administration on the need to find a political solution that preserves the prestige of the United States.

Analyses show that internal pressures in the United States played a crucial role in this shift, especially with the approaching congressional midterm elections. The Republican Party faces significant challenges amid declining presidential popularity and voter discontent over rising living costs and fuel prices resulting from military tensions.

Opinion polls indicate that the majority of the American public, including a wide segment of Republicans, oppose being drawn into long-term wars of attrition. Trump fears that continued fighting could lead to an 'electoral suicide' that would cost his party control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives next November.

Legal complexities also emerged regarding the necessity of obtaining parliamentary approval to continue military operations that have exceeded 60 days. This legal constraint raises concerns in White House circles, pushing for a diplomatic resolution of the issue to avoid a confrontation with Congress.

On the ground, experience has shown that US military power, despite its immense destructive capability, has not succeeded in imposing political change in Tehran. Analysts believe that economic sanctions and financial incentives may be more effective than aerial bombardment in extracting genuine concessions from the Iranian side.

The leaked 'agreement of principles' document includes fundamental clauses, including Iran's commitment not to seek nuclear weapons in exchange for a full lifting of economic sanctions. The agreement also includes the unfreezing of Iranian assets in international banks, a key demand for Tehran to accept de-escalation.

In contrast, Tel Aviv is monitoring these developments with great concern, as Israeli military circles prefer the continuation of military pressure to further weaken Iran. A clear divergence of interests is apparent, as Washington seeks an exit from the war while Israel sees its continuation as a strategic opportunity.

In conclusion, it appears that the final decision rests with the White House, which seeks to turn the page on confrontation before Trump's anticipated visit to Beijing. Israel finds itself compelled to follow the new American path, despite its desire to escalate operations, confirming that Washington holds the initiative at this stage.

The equation has changed from war until submission, to negotiations until an agreement is reached that saves face for both parties.

Washington Message

Washington – Said Arikat - 7/5/2026

In a scene reflecting the accelerating decline of freedom of expression within American universities, "Rutgers University" in New Jersey succumbed to pressure from pro-Israel groups and decided to withdraw its invitation to Palestinian-American businessman Rami Ghandour to deliver the commencement speech at the College of Engineering, despite the widespread support he enjoys within the campus.

Ghandour, the CEO of the biotechnology company Arcellx and one of the university's most prominent alumni, was invited to deliver the commencement address on May 15, before the dean of the college, Alberto Coetinho, suddenly withdrew the invitation, under the pretext of a very limited number of students objecting to Ghandour's critical stances on Israel.

According to information circulating within the university, the number of objectors did not exceed four students, in contrast to widespread support from thousands of students and alumni who saw Ghandour's selection as an inspiring model for a successful graduate who combined professional excellence with involvement in human justice issues. However, the university administration chose, as its critics say, to respond to the voice of the politically and media-backed influential minority, ignoring the general mood within the campus.

A university spokesperson confirmed that the decision came after concerns about some students boycotting the ceremony due to Ghandour's posts related to Israel. But the university avoided disclosing the nature of those posts, which mostly included photos and reports about the war in Gaza, along with comments accusing Israel of committing war crimes and implementing an apartheid system against Palestinians.

Ghandour is known for his public human rights activism, and the university itself had previously celebrated his role as executive producer of the documentary "The Voice of Hind Rajab," which documents the story of the Palestinian child Hind Rajab, who was killed during Israeli military operations in Gaza. However, this celebration quickly faded when his political stance became subject to attack by pro-Israel pressure groups.

In an angry response, Ghandour described the university's decision as "painful and shameful," considering that the academic institution, which had previously used his human rights activism to improve its public image, abandoned its principles at the first real political test. He said: “They celebrated my social justice when it was convenient for them, then they backed down when it became costly.”

This development comes at a time when American universities are witnessing an unprecedented campaign of pressure targeting voices supportive of Palestinians, whether students, professors, or guest speakers. Since the outbreak of the war on Gaza, universities have become an open political arena, where administrations face repeated threats from Republican politicians and influential donors demanding the suppression of any discourse critical of Israel.

In a similar incident, the University of Michigan this week was forced to disavow a speech given by history professor Derek Peterson during a commencement ceremony, after he praised students in solidarity with Palestine. The speech sparked threats to cut funding to the university, which prompted the administration to publicly apologize, a move that angered academic freedom advocacy groups.

Observers believe that what happened at Rutgers clearly reveals the limits of "freedom of expression" within American academic institutions when it comes to Israel. While universities boast slogans of diversity and intellectual openness, they often back down in the face of any political or financial pressure related to pro-Israel lobbies, even if the objection comes from a very small number of individuals.

The case of Rami Ghandour reveals the moral decline that has afflicted a number of major American universities, which have come to treat freedom of expression as a selective privilege rather than a fixed academic right. Rutgers University did not cancel the invitation because of hate speech or incitement, but because of political criticism of Israel based on documented facts and international human rights reports. More dangerously, the university succumbed to pressure from only four students, ignoring thousands of students who supported Ghandour's participation. This reflects the extent of the influence that pro-Israel pressure groups now exert within American educational institutions, even at the expense of universities' independence and academic credibility.

What happened at Rutgers raises a fundamental question about the nature of American democracy and its actual limits. When universities, which are supposed to be spaces for free discussion, become unable to host a speaker who criticizes a war that has killed tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, then talk of "intellectual pluralism" becomes an empty slogan. The war on Gaza has shown that there is a strict political ceiling within the United States that prevents real criticism of Israel without facing punishment or exclusion. Thus, academic institutions are gradually turning into tools subject to political intimidation and financial blackmail rather than independent arenas for thought and knowledge.

The striking paradox is that the increasing repression campaigns against voices in solidarity with Palestinians have begun to produce a counter-effect within American society, especially among youth and students. The more the pro-Palestine discourse is suppressed, the more widespread the conviction that there is an organized attempt to silence a humanitarian narrative related to rights and justice. Moreover, the repeated bowing of universities to pressure from pro-Israel lobbies harms the image of these institutions more than it protects them, as it reveals the fragility of their claim to independence. For many American students, universities today seem less willing to defend the principles they have long boasted about to the world.

Washington Message

Washington – Said Arikat – 7/5/2026

US House Representative Rashida Tlaib led a pressing political movement within Congress, through an official letter addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday, in which she called for urgent action in response to the Israeli forces' interception of the "Global Steadfastness" fleet in international waters, and the detention of dozens of activists and journalists.

According to the letter, Israeli forces intercepted nearly twenty civilian ships that were headed to the Gaza Strip, and detained at least 175 people, including American citizens, during a humanitarian mission aimed at breaking the siege imposed on the Strip and delivering food and medical aid. Tlaib described this action as a “blatant violation of international law,” demanding that the US administration intervene to protect its citizens and ensure the flow of humanitarian aid.

Tlaib strongly criticized the US State Department's stance, considering that its condemnation of the fleet participants instead of defending them represents a "dereliction of duty," and described the official discourse as a "distortion of facts," where – according to her – delivering food to those in need is portrayed as a hostile act, while the policies of siege and starvation are ignored.

Despite the release of most of the detainees, the representative expressed her concern about reports of some of them being subjected to ill-treatment during detention, and a number of American citizens being injured and transferred to hospitals after their release. She also pointed out the continued detention of two individuals, demanding immediate pressure for their release and ensuring their safety.

Tlaib also called on the US administration to retract any threats directed against the fleet participants or the countries that allow it to dock in their ports, and urged addressing the "roots of the crisis," represented by the Israeli siege imposed on Gaza, which she considered a direct cause of the worsening humanitarian crisis.

The letter affirmed that the continued restriction of aid entry contradicts the decisions of the International Court of Justice, and also relied on reports from the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Palestinian Territories, which concluded that Israeli policies in Gaza may amount to grave crimes, including creating living conditions that threaten the survival of the population.

In conclusion of her letter, Tlaib stressed the need for the United States to use its political influence to end the siege and ensure the arrival of aid, warning that the continuation of the current situation undermines Washington's legal and moral obligations, at a time when other ships of the fleet continue their mission despite the risks.

Tlaib's message reflects the escalating tension within the American political establishment regarding policy towards Israel, where unconditional support is no longer a consensus as it once was. The presence of voices within Congress openly criticizing the behavior of a strategic ally indicates a gradual shift in political discourse, driven by public opinion pressure and growing human rights reports. However, these voices remain limited in influence given traditional balances, which makes their actions closer to an attempt to break the prevailing narrative than being able to bring about immediate policy changes.

The incident also highlights a complex legal issue related to freedom of navigation in international waters and the limits of the use of force. The interception of civilian ships hundreds of miles from the coast raises questions about the extent of Israel's adherence to international maritime law, and places the United States in a critical position between protecting its citizens and maintaining its close alliance. This contradiction reveals a gap between the declared principles of American policy—such as protecting civilians—and actual practices on the ground.

This incident also reveals the humanitarian dimension of the crisis in Gaza, where official efforts are no longer sufficient to address the catastrophe, which drives international civil initiatives to try to break the siege. However, targeting these initiatives sends a strong deterrent message, meaning that any action outside traditional political channels may be met with force. In contrast, the continuation of these initiatives despite the risks reflects a growing global solidarity, but it raises a fundamental question about the effectiveness of symbolic actions in the absence of a genuine international will to impose actual change.

A recent investigative report by the British magazine "Declassified" revealed intriguing details from the diaries of the former Israeli Ambassador to London, Tzipi Hotovely, showing a complex network of relationships with British security officials and pro-occupation pressure groups. The investigation clarified that the Israeli Embassy transformed into an operations center for coordinating with prominent businessmen and donors to the British Labour Party, coinciding with the ongoing war of genocide in the Gaza Strip.

The leaked documents indicate that Hotovely, known for her inflammatory statements against Palestinians, exploited her position to entrench the occupation's narrative within UK decision-making circles. The ambassador had publicly suggested considering civilian facilities in Gaza, including schools and mosques, as legitimate military targets, which observers deemed direct incitement to commit war crimes.

The diaries showed a close and continuous working relationship between Israeli pressure groups in Britain and the embassy in London, despite claims by groups such as "Friends of Israel" in both the Conservative and Labour parties of not receiving direct funding from Tel Aviv. Records revealed at least four meetings with Stuart Polak, the honorary director of the Conservative Friends of Israel group, who describes himself as a fierce defender of Israeli interests in the House of Lords.

The meetings were not limited to British figures but also included high-ranking Israeli diplomats such as Yossi Amrani, head of the diplomatic division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Merav Eilon Shahar, deputy director of strategic affairs. These meetings, which took place in the second half of 2024, reflect a high level of diplomatic coordination to ensure continued British support for Israeli policies in the region.

In a related context, the names of John Pearce, head of Labour Friends of Israel, and Lord Jonathan Mendelson emerged as regular visitors to the ambassador's residence. The organization justified these meetings as aiming to discuss humanitarian issues and the release of detainees, but the timing and nature of these meetings raised questions about the extent of the embassy's influence on the positions of the ruling Labour Party leaders.

The diaries also included meetings with Luke Akehurst, Labour MP and former director of the "We Believe in Israel" lobbying group. These meetings took place on the sidelines of major party conferences, indicating the penetration of the pro-occupation lobby into the organizational structures of major British parties and its ability to directly access decision-makers.

The investigation raised serious concerns about the proximity of Labour Party funders to the Israeli government, as Hotovely met with Stuart Roden, who donated over half a million pounds to the party before the 2024 elections. Roden, who heads an Israeli venture capital firm, is a prominent defender of Israeli military operations, describing them as part of a "clash of civilizations."

According to press sources, Roden conducts informal dialogues with the Labour Party leadership to express his views on issues concerning the occupation. His appearance in the ambassador's diaries coincided with the Kier Starmer government taking power, reinforcing assumptions about the existence of back channels to influence British foreign policy towards the Palestinian issue.

The ambassador's activities extended to the business and real estate sectors, where she met with Jonathan Goldstein, a businessman who supported election campaigns for Labour Party leaders. Goldstein, who previously chaired the Jewish Leadership Council, participated in pro-occupation rallies and coordinated directly with Israeli ministers to enhance joint cooperation at the height of the aggression on Gaza.

In a sensitive economic aspect, the investigation revealed a secret meeting between Hotovely and Michael Denison, head of international consulting at the giant British oil company BP. This meeting took place in November 2023, coinciding with the Israeli Ministry of Energy's announcement of new licenses for gas exploration in the Mediterranean Sea, one of which was won by a consortium including BP.

UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese criticized the involvement of private companies like BP in what she described as the "genocide economy." Albanese pointed out that the company's expansion into exploring Palestinian maritime areas illegally exploited by the occupation represents a contribution to entrenching the occupation and ongoing violations against the Palestinian people.

Military industries were not absent from the ambassador's agenda, as she met with representatives of the state-owned Israeli company "Rafael," responsible for manufacturing missiles used to destroy residential areas in Gaza. This coordination aims to ensure the flow of military supplies and maintain technical partnerships with the British defense sector.

The list of visitors included prominent members of the House of Lords, such as Lord Browne, former CEO of BP, and Lord Feldman, former chairman of the Conservative Party. These meetings, which included working breakfasts and lunches, show the intimacy of the relationship between the British political elite and the diplomatic representation of the occupation.

The investigation concluded that these coordinated moves aim to build a political and economic protective wall for Israel in Britain to counter increasing international pressure. The documents confirm that the Israeli lobby is working diligently behind the scenes to ensure no fundamental shift in the British stance towards the genocidal crimes committed in the Gaza Strip.

Every school, every mosque, and every second home in Gaza has access to underground tunnels, and is therefore a legitimate target for Israel.