Israel and Its Collaborators in Gaza

By Ali Saadeh

The structure of the Hebrew state is based on mercenaries, collaborators, and agents. As revealed in Gaza, Israel is no more than a gang of murderers and a terrorist organization in the guise of a “state.”

Therefore, it is of no surprise it currently sponsors gangs of drug dealers, murderers, and thugs, and has created mercenary groups and armed Palestinian militias to operate in parallel with the Israeli military forces and under the supervision of the Israeli General Security Service (Shin Bet).

The Israeli government is today arming Palestinian militias in Gaza, under the direct direction and orders of Benjamin Netanyahu to confront Hamas and other Palestinian resistance groups.

Tel Aviv acknowledges the existence of at least three groups it is supplying with weapons and are funding them in Gaza and pursue Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters without revealing direct Israeli military involvement.

These militias do not receive regular Israeli weapons but supplied with weapons confiscated by the army from the resistance factions in Gaza and weapons seized from Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. This makes their combat gear appear more like “spoils of war” than Israeli military equipment.

In addition, their members receive monthly salaries and permits to carry weapons from the Israeli army, making them more like local mercenaries serving the occupation’s goals under Palestinian cover.

One of these militias, led by Yasser Abu Shabab and stationed in the eastern areas of Rafah, is the most prominent example of this formation and enjoys direct protection from the Israeli army. Other formations include young men from the clans and activists opposed to Hamas, many of whom belong to the Fatah movement.

According to Israeli sources, the tasks of these groups include gathering intelligence, monitoring areas emptied of Hamas and Islamic Jihad members, and participating in maintaining security in areas crowded with displaced civilians in the southern Gaza Strip, according to Haaretz.

While the Israeli army and the Shin Bet promote the idea that these militias would constitute a “local alternative” to Hamas in the medium term, indicators on the ground show otherwise. Hamas and the resistance factions continue to dominate the scene throughout the Gaza Strip.

These groups train openly under the noses of Israeli forces inside the Strip and move freely near invading units, in small formations of between five and 10 armed men.

To avoid confusion, the Israeli army began in recent weeks to code the locations of these militia members in its command and control system, just as it designates the locations of its own forces, and making them part of its field military plan.

According to army commanders, these militias are participating in “large-scale and important operations within sensitive areas.” However, they also warn of the risk of losing control over them, with some saying: “Tomorrow they might commit a massacre. Who will bear the responsibility then?”

Haaretz military correspondent Yaniv Kubitsch pointed out that arming mercenary militias to carry out dirty operations or massacres is not new, recalling what happened in Lebanon during the 1980s, when pro-occupation militias committed the Sabra and Shatila massacre in 1982 after the Israeli army besieged the camp.

According to Kubitsch, the army and the Shin Bet direct these militias to carry out missions, often in densely-populated areas in the southern Gaza Strip, where residents displaced from northern and central Gaza are concentrated.

Israeli media cites lessons from previous experiences in the region, from the South Lebanon Army to attempts to establish local entities in the West Bank, the experiences of the Sahwa (awakening) in Iraq, and the role of militias in Afghanistan and Syria.

He says,: “All of these are examples that demonstrate that local militias can turn against their back or spawn conflicting forces that weaken the state’s authority.”

Recently, Hussam al-Astal, former member of the Palestinian Authority’s security forces, emerged and announced the formation of such an armed group in the Qizan al-Najjar area, southeast of Khan Yunis, which has been completely evacuated.

Astal called on residents to move to areas under his control and provide them with food, water, and shelter. He told The Times of Israel that his group would welcome anyone hostile to Hamas and that he had enough food, water, and shelter for everyone.

He noted that in the coming days, he would work to welcome about 400 Palestinians after verifying their security IDs. He said he was responsible for the area, as was Yasser Abu Shabab, who was responsible for areas east of Rafah and parts of eastern Khan Yunis. He confirmed he was in contact with Abu Shabab but was operating independently.

Astal is no stranger to collaborating; he worked for several years in Israel and later with the Palestinian Authority’s security forces when they still controlled Gaza.

He spoke of coordination between his group and the occupation, noting he received support from several sources, including the United States, Europe, and unspecified Arab countries.

Al-Astal was detained by the Hamas government’s security services after they succeeded in luring him from outside the Gaza Strip to the territory, indirectly through one of his brothers, an officer in the Hamas government’s internal security service. He was investigated on charges of collaborating with the occupation at the time, regarding his involvement in the assassination of engineer Fadi al-Batsh in Malaysia in 2018.

In 2022, the Permanent Military Court in Gaza issued a death sentence against al-Astal after convicting him of killing al-Batsh.

After the outbreak of the war, al-Astal managed to escape from prison and attempted to flee towards Israel. However, after the emergence of Yasser Abu Shabab’s group in Rafah, he joined it and fought with it, before establishing his new group alongside other militants, most of whom were accused of collaborating with Israel and thus held in Gaza prisons.

However, the collaborator remains, in the eyes of his employer, a mere dirty tool he manipulates according to his own interests. When his usefulness expires, the enemy throws him in the trash can and leaves him to his inevitable fate, which is being recorded on the streets by the Palestinian people. This punishment has become imminent after the recent scenes of the resistance executing a group of collaborators.

This feature was written recently by Ali Saadeh in Arabic and published in Assabeel.

  • CrossFireArabia

    CrossFireArabia

    Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

    Related Posts

    Hormuz: End of an Era of Martime Dominance

    By Ismail Al-Sharif

    “Nations that believe themselves to be eternal are often the first to be surprised by history.” – Charles de Gaulle

    In May 1949, the Chinese Civil War was nearing its conclusion in favor of the Communists under Mao Zedong. At that time, Great Britain, the world’s most powerful nation, maintained warships on the Yangtze River to protect its citizens and commercial interests in cities like Shanghai and Nanjing. Among these ships was the British frigate HMS Amethyst.

    On April 20, 1949, the frigate sailed up the Yangtze River toward Nanjing, but the Communist forces, who controlled the northern bank of the river, considered the ship’s presence a foreign intervention in the war. Suddenly, Chinese artillery began bombarding the ship, inflicting direct hits. Its captain and several crew members were killed, and its navigation system was disabled before it finally ran aground in the mud near the shore.

    Other British ships attempted to come to its aid, but they too were fired upon by Chinese artillery and forced to retreat. The ship remained trapped for four months under fire from communist forces, amidst tense negotiations between Great Britain and the communist leadership.

    On the night of July 30, 1949, the ship’s new captain, John Cairns, decided to execute a daring plan. He waited for a merchant ship to pass, then moved behind it in the darkness, taking advantage of its cover. His plan succeeded; the ship managed to escape and reach open waters.

    This incident is considered a symbol of the end of the era of British imperial dominance and a harbinger of its decline. Many historians cite it as the moment when the great powers realized that the world had changed and that the balance of power was no longer what it once was. This story is repeating itself today, but it’s not about a single ship; it extends to the American destroyers that patrol our seas.

    Half a century ago, missile production was prohibitively expensive, and the technology for precise guidance systems was unavailable. Therefore, the American navy was designed according to the realities of that era. Then came the 21st century, when electronic technology and computers became accessible to everyone, and precision guidance systems became readily available, whether in a sophisticated missile or a simple drone.

    The Ukrainian war revealed that the era of tanks is over; they became easy targets for drones that cost only a few thousand dollars each. Similarly, the Iranian war reveals that warships at sea are like tanks on land: Easy targets for drones and missiles.

    Consider the crown jewel of the American navy, the aircraft carrier USS Eisenhower, which resembles a floating city with an area of ​​approximately 18,900 square meters. It is accompanied by other highly advanced destroyers possessing immense destructive power. However, no destroyer carries an equal number of interceptor missiles and drones to those possessed by its adversaries.

    This is why Iran continues to defy this presence and close the Strait of Hormuz. This scenario is reminiscent of the Houthis’ actions when a group from one of the world’s poorest countries challenged the world’s most powerful nations and managed to disrupt shipping in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait last year.

    Iran controls the northern coast of the Strait of Hormuz and possesses a diverse arsenal that includes land-based missiles, submarines, drones, fast attack craft, and sea mines. In contrast, US warships have only a limited number of defense systems compared to the size of Iran’s arsenal in this region.

    Military strategists have formulated a simple equation called the “fire-off equation.” This equation posits that a ship’s survival depends less on its destructive power and more on the ratio of threats directed at it to the number of interceptor missiles it possesses to counter them. When Iran or the Houthis launch a salvo of 50 drones at a destroyer with a limited stockpile of interceptor missiles—a stockpile that cannot be replenished in combat—the objective is not necessarily to sink the ship directly, but rather to exhaust its defenses. Once the interceptor missiles are depleted, these destroyers are reduced to approximately 9000 tons of scrap metal adrift at sea.

    In late 2023 and throughout 2024, the Houthis targeted ships in the Red Sea, placing the US Navy in a precarious position. Unable to forcibly reopen the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, commercial shipping was rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope, a detour of approximately 19,000 kilometers. This added weeks to each voyage and incurred additional costs estimated at thousands of dollars. Thus, the most powerful navy in history found itself unable to secure the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

    For 80 years, the global economy has been built on the assumption that US ships can keep shipping lanes open. However, recent conflicts demonstrate that this assumption is beginning to crumble. Naval power can still destroy the largest fleets on the high seas, but on coastlines and in narrow waterways, it appears less decisive.

    It’s a story reminiscent of the British frigate HMS Amethyst; a moment when superpowers discover their power is no longer what it once was, and that the era of absolute dominance is drawing to a close.

    This article by Ismail Al Sharif was originally written in Arabic for the Addustour daily and reprinted here in crossfirearabia.com

    Continue reading
    How Will Trump Get Out of This War?

    By Ismail Al Sharif

    “We are in an advanced position, and we will decide when the war will end,” said Kazem Gharibabadi, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister.

    President Donald Trump, in coordination with the Zionist entity, is igniting a regional war with Iran which is an unprecedented event in the region. Analysis of the true motives behind this fateful decision vary. One school of thought believes the strategic objective lies in controlling Iranian oil wealth and containing growing Chinese influence. Another links this to the Epstein affair, based on claims of Zionist pressure threatening to expose him to sensitive information.

    A third school believes that Trump is tied to political commitments made to Miriam Adelson, who generously funded his election campaign. Some go even further, alleging that Trump, known for his transactional negotiating style, received substantial financial compensation for engaging in this war. In a related context however, recent reports indicate that Trump himself has blamed his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and several close advisors for instigating this latest military adventure.

    Whatever the true motives behind igniting this war, one path seems almost certain to end it: Trump will hold a press conference declaring a unilateral and absolute victory. The precise timing of this declaration remains uncertain.

    But the decision to cease hostilities does not rest with Trump alone; it is contingent upon the agreement of two other key parties: Tehran and Israel.

    Israel shows no desire to end this war, as it is the primary beneficiary of its continuation. It systematically seeks to dismantle the structure of the Islamic Republic and sees no harm in the regime’s collapse leading to widespread chaos engulfing Iran and the entire region.

    If Trump fails to restrain Netanyahu, the latter will not hesitate to continue his military operations even after any official American declaration of a ceasefire. This may explain why Trump declared that any settlement to end the conflict would only be possible with Netanyahu’s consent and explicit blessing.

    However, the Zionist entity might feign acceptance of a ceasefire while its Mossad intelligence apparatus works behind the scenes to fuel separatist and rebellious sentiments among ethnic minorities within Iran, such as the Kurds and Balouchis, potentially threatening the cohesion of the Iranian state from within. In response, Tehran would have no choice but to continue targeting the entity, which would then retaliate swiftly, potentially drawing Trump back into a cycle of military confrontation.

    Adding to Trump’s predicament is the possibility that he might ultimately declare a ceasefire unilaterally, without any fundamental change to the structure of the Iranian regime, and without extracting any genuine concessions from Tehran regarding halting uranium enrichment, dismantling its missile program, or severing its ties with regional allies—the very pretexts used to launch the war.

    Even more dangerous is the fact that the Islamic Republic’s resilience and its emergence from this crisis with its system intact will make it a unique and exceptional model: The first country to challenge American hegemony and emerge unscathed. This could encourage other countries suffering under the weight of Trump’s policies or ambitions—such as Venezuela and Greenland—to adopt resistance as a path, even if they lack Iran’s military capabilities.

    It seems to me that President Trump may be following in the footsteps of his predecessor, George W. Bush, when he famously declared victory in 2003 from the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, which was then—as it is today—at the eye of the American military storm. It is worth recalling here that Bush’s speech was a highly symbolic and premature declaration, one that was quickly contradicted by events, as the war on Iraqi soil continued for nearly a decade afterward.

    The war has exhausted Iran and burdened it with immense hardships, making it seriously seek a cessation of hostilities. However, it simultaneously finds itself in direct confrontation with American will. Iranian officials have made it clear that any agreement to a ceasefire and the resumption of negotiations is contingent upon receiving firm guarantees from Washington and Tel Aviv that the aggression will not be repeated. Should Tehran manage to withstand and overcome this phase, it is likely to add to its list of demands one of which is the lifting of some of the sanctions imposed upon it.

    Therefore, it appears that the Iranian strategy is essentially based on a policy of systematic attrition; simultaneously exhausting the United States and Israel by driving oil prices to high levels and closing the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s vital energy artery. This would impose heavy economic burdens that might ultimately compel Washington to reconsider its calculations and agree to a ceasefire.

    In short, Trump will not be in a position to deliver a victory speech in the next week or two, and any such declaration without genuine cooperation from Israel and Iran will amount to nothing more than empty rhetoric devoid of any real substance on the ground. There is no doubt that President Trump has put himself, his country, and the entire region in a very complex strategic predicament, from which the way out may not be as easy as those who made the decision to go to war imagine.

    This analysis was originally written in Arabic and reprinted in crossfirearabia.com

    Continue reading

    You Missed

    Pezeshkian: ‘Iran Will Not Surrender to Bullies’

    Pezeshkian: ‘Iran Will Not Surrender to Bullies’

    Israeli Soldiers Enforce Closure of Al Aqsa

    Israeli Soldiers Enforce Closure of Al Aqsa

    1 in 7 Displaced in Lebanon – NRC

    1 in 7 Displaced in Lebanon – NRC

    Hormuz: End of an Era of Martime Dominance

    Hormuz: End of an Era of Martime Dominance

    Gaza Faces Massive Dust Storm

    Gaza Faces Massive Dust Storm

    US-Israeli Strikes Kill 503, Injures 5,700 Iranians

    US-Israeli Strikes Kill 503, Injures 5,700 Iranians