Beyond Extermination: Zionist Strategy to End Palestinians

By Nawaf Al-Zaru

In light of what is happening in Gaza — a Zionist war of extermination of complete destruction and annihilation of entire neighborhoods and demolition of homes on the heads of its people in the many cities, towns, and villages of the Strip, amounting to a policy of ethnic cleansing — coupled with the revealed plans to displace and resettle them, and in light of the silent, genocidal war of uprooting in the West Bank, it is to be asserted this war is but another stage in the Zionist terror campaign against Palestinian existence and civilization.

Our people have faced more than 77 years of policies of ethnic cleansing and open Zionist war crimes in Palestine, but today the world remains silent, failing to show the same resolve as it does elsewhere, and with lame-duck international institutions like the World Criminal Court failing despite the Israeli atrocities and military incursions in Gaza, Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm-Nur Shams, Aqabat Jabr camp, Hebron and many other areas.

We have never witnessed such widespread destruction, mass killings, or genocide to children, women, and the elderly. We have never seen entire families burned alive as we have seen in Palestine since the beginning of the Nakba and the establishment of the Zionist entity in 1948.

We have never seen the complete demolition of cities, towns, villages, and neighborhoods, nor the complete erasure of a people’s civilization as is happening in Palestine, and Gaza especially. All these crimes were and continue to be committed in Palestine, broadcast to the eyes of the entire world, yet this world remains unmoved and untouched…!

Here, we will point to documents and testimonies related to the systematic destruction of Palestinian society as we have repeatedly mentioned in previous studies and reiterate here:

That the true, undeclared objectives of the Israeli occupation army is: Total destruction and demolition of Palestinian society.

Let’s set the record straight: What Benjamin Netanyahu and his Zionist war cabinet declared around-the-clock about their war aims — eliminating Hamas’s military capabilities and freeing the hostages (prisoners) — are nothing but false and deceptive objectives for public consumption. Their true, undeclared goals are the genocide of the Palestinian people, especially women and children, complete destruction of infrastructure (leveling everything above ground), and the mass displacement of Palestinians, with the entire Gaza Strip becoming uninhabitable.

An Israeli officer who served in the Gaza Strip revealed that the army’s missions here is almost entirely limited to securing large-scale demolition operations, which is a clear admission of the complete destruction of infrastructure and homes as being one of the war’s main objectives. In its July 18, 2025 edition, the Haaretz newspaper quoted the officer, identified only by his initials as saying: “The soldiers’ families need to understand what’s happening there. The primary, and almost sole, mission of the [Israeli] forces is securing the bulldozers’ demolition operations…”

He explained the operations are carried out under a military designation known as “roof-to- ground,” aiming to systematically destroy neighborhoods and infrastructure. According to the officer’s testimony, the Israeli army’s operations in the Gaza Strip are based on “massive demolition of homes,” without any precise intelligence about specific targets, repeating “what is happening is simply widespread destruction, carried out according to a pre-planned operational strategy and indicators.”

Meanwhile, Ronen Bergman, military affairs commentator for Yediot Aharonot, confirmed very early in this war “military pressure does not lead to the release of the hostages in Gaza, and the Israeli leadership knows this very well, but it is used as a pretext to continue the genocidal and destructive ground war.” Similarly, in an article by Joshua Frank published in the US Nation Magazine (January 16, 2024) he stated that “for Israel, brutality is the objective of its campaign against Gaza.” He asserted “Israel’s goal in bombing the Gaza Strip is to render it uninhabitable by the end of its relentless military campaign.”

So as not to confuse people about the true Zionist objectives behind this genocidal war, and to follow events with a strategic reading of the developments on the ground and the current and potential political agendas, he pointed to Israeli writer Yuval Abraham who documented the Israeli war plan objectives. He explained: According to sources who spoke to the joint research team, the targets in Gaza bombed by Israeli aircraft can be divided broadly into four categories:

The first category includes what are known as “tactical targets,” of standard military targets such as armed military cells, weapons depots, ground- and anti-tank missile launchers, launch pits, mortar positions, military headquarters, observation posts, and so on.

The second category refers to “underground targets,” primarily tunnels dug by Hamas under neighborhoods and under civilian homes. Air strikes on these targets can lead to the collapse of houses above or near the tunnels.

The third category of targets— most important and dangerous— are the “targets of force” including high-rise buildings and residential towers in city centers, and public buildings such as universities, banks, and government offices. The aim behind the deliberate bombing and destruction of such targets is to force the Palestinian community to emigrate.

The final category consists of “family homes.” The stated purpose of these attacks is to destroy private residences in order to assassinate a resident suspected of being an activist in Hamas or Islamic Jihad. However, Palestinian testimonies from the current war confirm that none of the families killed included any activists from these organizations.

The Israeli army, as demonstrated around-the-clock in Gaza and Lebanon, gives special attention to the third and fourth categories that are regarded as the true major strategic objectives and mean the complete annihilation of everything Palestinian on the land of the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu’s strategy is to destroy Palestinian society in Gaza and force its population to leave

The defeat of 7 October, 2023, prompted Netanyahu to make the most important decision of his political career: To destroy and displace Palestinian society in Gaza as punishment for what happened in the settlements surrounding Gaza, just as the first Nakba is narrated in the Israeli narrative as punishment for the Palestinians for rejecting the partition plan and attacking Jewish society. Implementation is hesitant and statements are confusing, but actions are clear: “The government is rushing towards the annihilation of Gaza,” as Minister of Heritage Amichai Eliyahu states. This is the “complete victory” Netanyahu promised (Aluf Benn, Haaretz on 31 July, 2025).

Israelis: ‘We are all criminals and part of the genocidal family’

Israeli analyst Michael Sfard confirms the systematic nature of the destruction: “Israel is destroying Gaza now. Call it ethnic cleansing, call it annihilation, you can call it genocide, call it whatever you want. I have no doubt that whoever coined the term genocide, the Polish-Jewish jurist Raphael Lemkin, would have written with tears of shame that the Jewish state is committing genocide in Gaza. It is destroying the place and liquidating the human group that lives there. The physical destruction of Gaza’s space is systematic, house after house, public building after public building, infrastructure after infrastructure… A place that was home to more than a million people has been reduced to rubble. Educational institutions, clinics, shops, water, electricity, and sewage infrastructure, streets and sidewalks, all of it has turned to ash.”

Data calculated based on aerial photographs indicates 70 percent of the buildings in the Gaza Strip were either completely destroyed or damaged beyond repair. This was before Operation Gideon’s “Arava 2” and the fulfillment of the Defense Minister’s promise to the rabbis of “religious Zionism” that “Gaza will be like Beit Hanoun” (Michael Sfard, Haaretz, 29 August, 2025).

Researcher Dr. Walid Mustafa confirmed in his study, “The Mass Destruction of Palestinian Villages,” that “62.6% of all Palestinian villages that existed in Palestine were demolished by the Zionists. If we consider that some districts of Palestine did not fall entirely under enemy control in 1948, we find that the 468 villages destroyed before 1967 constituted 78.4% of the 598 Palestinian villages that fell under Zionist control that year.” The study’s documented tables also state “the number of Palestinian sites…” The number of villages that existed in Palestine according to the 1931 administrative divisions was 755, of which 472 were destroyed during 1948. At that time, they had 52,812 houses, and their population, according to the 1945 census, was 338,428.

In a report by the Israeli writer Zafrir Rinat, published in Haaretz and titled “Where Did the Arab Villages Disappear To?”, he stated: “Historians critical of the Zionist movement, in particular, such as Dr. Ilan Pappe, argue that the disappearance of Palestinian villages from their locations is part of a systematic and programmed policy to erase their existence in order to fabricate a new history that aligns with the Zionist narrative, which claims that the land was empty and was transformed into a green and prosperous land due to the activities of the Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael (KKL), also known as the Jewish National Fund and other similar organizations.” Pappe further states “the history of Palestine is being transferred to the era of the ancient Talmud.”

Another study in recent years by Naga Kedmon (as part of Peace and Development Studies commissioned by the University of Gothenburg in Sweden and directed by Professor Oren Yiftachel of Ben-Gurion University) found that “the Keren Kayemet forests, which include 86 Palestinian villages, are referred to as ‘Moroccan.’ While most sites have directional signs, only 15 percent mention the Arab village at the site, and the majority of texts in brochures, newspapers, and advertisements do not mention the names of the Palestinian villages at all, nor do they acknowledge their Arab identity.”

In this context, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz exclusively revealed a “premeditated campaign to demolish mosques.” Its correspondent, Meron Rapaport, noted “Israel demolished at least 120 mosques in the Palestinian villages it occupied in 1948, in addition to some Christian churches. It even demolished several synagogues…during this campaign.” He explained “this demolition, often carried out with dynamite, was intended to eliminate any Arab presence in the country and to preserve only what remained of Jewish heritage, erasing any Arab trace. It was as if the Israelis wanted to say this land belonged only to the Jews, and that there was no Arab presence in it.”

In his extensive report, which draws on a recently published book in London by Israeli archaeologist Raz Kletter, Rapaport adds he “was not surprised by what the Israelis did to the Palestinians at that time in terms of displacement and destruction, because if the Arabs had been victorious, they would not have done anything different.”

Rapaport quotes from Kletter’s book: “What happened was the radical destruction of cities and villages, the destruction of an entire civilization, with its present and its past, and of landmarks of life spanning 3,000 years, even the remaining synagogues in the demolished Arab neighborhoods, mosaics, and fortresses. Had it not been for some fanatics on this subject, like Yehoshua Heschel Yevin and others, they would have wiped everything off the face of the earth.” He emphasizes that “the demolition aimed to eliminate the remnants of the Arab presence that disturbed the Israeli leaders.”

Thus, the documents released from the Israeli army archives reveal “since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the Israeli army has worked to erase the traces of Arab villages and towns whose inhabitants were displaced and wiped off the map. It also carried out campaigns to blow up mosques and shrines on the orders of the then-commander of the Southern Front, Moshe Dayan, who, according to the Israeli historian, transformed Palestine into a devastated desert to obliterate the existing Arab civilization and establish Israel upon it.”

If we add to this to the myriad of Israeli, Palestinian, and British documents, it can be confirmed the policy of the comprehensive demolition of Palestinian cities and villages, and the policy of the mass expulsion of the Palestinian people, were considered fundamental pillars of the Zionist movement and the State of Israel.

This policy was considered one of the most closely guarded secrets in Israel, as Professor Israel Shahak confirms: “Before 1948, within the territory that became the State of Israel, this matter was one of the most closely guarded secrets in Israeli life. There is no publication, book, or pamphlet that discusses their number or locations. This is intentional, so that the accepted official myth of an empty land would be readily disseminated in Israeli schools and told to visitors and tourists.”

Therefore, we say that perhaps the Hebrew/Zionist documents and testimonies related to the Nakba and ethnic cleansing and the total destruction of Palestine at the hands of Zionist organizations and the Zionist state, which are being revealed gradually over widely-spaced periods, are among the most important documents that can condemn the generals of those organizations and the Zionist state for committing premeditated war crimes, and even bring them before the International Criminal Court, if the world is serious about that.

Perhaps the data of the current Palestinian scene, where the occupying state is committing a total holocaust against our people in Gaza, constitutes a blatant indictment against Zionist crimes that necessitates bringing the politicians and generals of the Israeli occupation state before the International Criminal Court without any hesitation if the world were serious…

This article by Nawaf Al Zaru was published on the Arabic Rai Al Youm website and reproduced on crossfirearabia.com. Mr Al Zaro lives in Amman, Jordan and is well-known for his extensive research on Palestinian affairs and the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. He has published many books and frequently contributes to Jordanian and Arab newspapers.

Continue reading
Trump, Netanyahu Rift Hits Rock Bottom: View From Amman

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

The Epic Fury Operation launched by the US against Iran in February 2026, will go down in modern history as the first open military conflict, where a superpower like the United States, has willingly and openly played the role of a war-proxy, on behalf of its smaller ally, Israel.

The difference of attitude between the two close allies, US and Israel, in relation to what they perceived as Iran’s threat, imminent or potential, was a key factor behind the gradual crumbling of the American-Israeli coordinated military and intelligence efforts, to bring down the regime in Tehran.


Israel under Benjamin Netanyahu’s extreme right-wing government, kept saying Iran posed an imminent existential threat to Israel, and therefore it must be brought down by force. While the US position was constrained by its previous international commitments on the issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, as stipulated in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed between Iran and the P5+1 powers, during the administration of President Obama.


Since that moment Netanyahu kept vigorously urging, more likely lecturing the US and the West, on the dangers of the JCOPA agreement. When Donald Trump was elected President in 2017, things took an important and completely different turn. In the following year, he took the United States out of that internationally-backed deal as he had promised to do during his election campaign. He also kept his promises of moving the US Embassy to Occupied Jerusalem and recognize the occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel.


These symbolic and important gestures, whetted Netanyahu’s appetite for more American concessions to Israeli demands.


Netanyahu’s golden opportunity came when Trump was re-elected to his second term in 2023, the same year when Hamas launched its massive assault on the Israeli settlements in the so-called “Gaza enevlope”. Other militias connected and supported by Iran, including the Houthis in north Yemen, Hezbollah in south Lebanon, Syria under the previous regime and Shia factions in Iraq coordinated their efforts to stand by Hamas during that long and unprecedented confrontation with Israel.

For its part, Iran did not shy from making it clear that it helped create this “chain” of resistance factions to encircle Israel from three directions.

The second turning magical point in the US position on the issue of direct military intervention against Iran came about when Israel succeeded in serving Hezbollah, the severest military blow ever, in the pagers’ operation and the subsequent assassination of Hezbollah’s top leaders, including its charismatic Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on Sept 27, 2024.


Trump was very impressed with all of that Israeli action and Netanyahu gave himself the full credit for this unexpected success.


Accordingly, Netanyahu’s plan to Trump was simple. Based on the Israeli accumulated intelligence and expertise on the Iranian internal scene and emulating its operation against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon, accompanied by massive American air strikes would provide both allies with the best chance to finish the Ayatollahs in Tehran once and for all!


But as events unfolded, all of Netanyahu’s plans, personally and strongly endorsed by Trump and his military aides, suddenly started crumbling, one after the other. His relations with Trump slipped into stages of deterioration by the day and week as the closure of the Hormuz Strait by Iran, started hurting the world economy led by the US.


Here new red lights went on and the phone calls between the two men became more intense and vulgar. Then Trump decided to pass on the torch to his deputy, JD Vance, who seemed comfortable to tell Netanyahu what Trump avoided to do!


Conclusion: It is tricky to switch roles of allies in wars. A smaller entity can always stay safe as long as its leaders know the limits of their power and leverage. When people like Netanyahu think they have more power and clout than they actually have, versus their stronger ally, then irritation starts to brew, especially in the case of Trump who likes to show he is always in the driving seat. It also means that the leadership on the side of stronger partner has some problems of its own!


Whether it is a wrangle, rift, collision, divorce or worse between Trump and Netanyahu, we will not know for certain, until the negotiators in Switzerland close their files and head back home!

Continue reading
Will The US-Iran Deal Last?

By Ali Bakir

On June 15, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced via the US social media platform X that a peace deal between the US and Iran had been reached, following over two months of mediation by his country. Sharif expressed gratitude to Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye for their significant contributions, stating that the official signing ceremony would take place on June 19 in Switzerland. Following this announcement, a memorandum of understanding was signed electronically by US President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance on the US side, and by Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on the Iranian side.

The reported agreement is characterized as a framework peace deal aimed at ending the 2026 Israel/US-Iran war and transitioning the current ceasefire into a broader diplomatic process. Although the text of the agreement has not yet been published, key reported elements include immediate cessation of military operations, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping, and a 60-day negotiation period to address unresolved issues, particularly Iran’s nuclear program, alongside discussions on sanctions relief and access to frozen Iranian assets during follow-up negotiations.

This agreement follows two significant developments. First, Israel conducted military strikes on Iranian targets in western and central Iran around a week ago, marking the first such actions since April. Explosions were reported in Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, and other cities in response to Iranian missile launches that were highly performative. Second, Trump warned that Iran would “pay the price” for what he described as slow progress in negotiations to end the conflict, indicating that the US could resume strikes against Iranian infrastructure.

5 bullet points on the agreement

Although the agreement does not necessarily mean that the root causes that prompted the war have fully disappeared, a few observations are worth mentioning and analyzing.

First, a lot of narrative spinning is occurring publicly at the moment. While the main parties are trying to sell the agreement as a victory, there are factions within the broader regional camps (such as hardliners in both Iran and Israel) that oppose it. Critics in Iran have labeled the agreement a “humiliating capitulation,” arguing that it involves unjustified concessions. Hardline opponents have publicly criticized the negotiating team, with Iranian MP Mahmoud Nabavian stating that the latest draft is “more damaging” than previous versions. Similarly, Israeli officials emphasized that Israel was not directly involved in negotiating the US–Iran deal and does not necessarily consider itself bound by its provisions. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that Israel would not withdraw from territory seized in Lebanon and would continue to act against threats from Hezbollah and Iran if necessary.

Second, the timing of the agreement suggests that Iran was running out of options. As the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) focused on messaging and performative measures, the gap between their narrative and reality widened, with Iran’s ability to endure further pressure significantly diminishing. Trump’s counter-blockade against Iran’s restriction of the Strait of Hormuz imposed significant economic costs on Iran, leading to the decision to sign the agreement. It is estimated that the blockade could have cost Iran over $24 billion in just two months — almost equal to Iran’s reported total reserves of foreign currency — leaving the regime with little choice but to agree to the terms or face economic collapse.

Third, despite the negative reactions from hardliners in both Iran and Israel, the agreement highlights Trump’s genuine interest in reaching a resolution with Iran, especially following last year’s swift 12-day war between Israel and Iran. However, radical elements in both Iran and Israel seem intent on using procrastination, escalation, or military actions to sabotage meaningful attempts to achieve peace. Given that there is reportedly a 60-day negotiation period following the signing of the agreement, it is likely that these factions will continue to work against a comprehensive resolution.

Fourth, while Pakistan played a significant role in the mediation process, Qatar’s involvement was also crucial, as acknowledged by American, Pakistani, Saudi, and Turkish officials. Notably, neither the Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman nor the ministry itself reported any independent measures taken by Qatar, apart from endorsing Pakistan’s mediation efforts. In fact, a Qatari spokesman denied any independent role in the mediation at this stage. Qatar’s involvement appears to have been executed at the request of the United States and had several dimensions.

Primarily, Qatar facilitated technical issues between the US and Iran, such as enabling the transfer of Iranian funds without direct US involvement, thereby avoiding the perception of it being a US initiative or taxpayer-funded. Additionally, Qatar played a role in establishing a communication channel between the United Arab Emirates and Iran, which emerged later in the mediation process. Finally, Qatar aligned itself with Saudi Arabia’s position, providing support for the Pakistani initiative.

Changing actors

Fifth, two awkward positions regarding the agreement can be highlighted. Firstly, the Europeans have been largely inactive in resolving the crisis yet somehow managed to host the official signing ceremony between the Americans and Iranians. Instead of crediting Pakistan, Switzerland offered to host the ceremony, which can be seen as an act of opportunism. Secondly, Oman, historically a favored mediator between the US and Iran, has been notably absent from this current arrangement. Oman’s position during this war was not popular in the Gulf Cooperation Council and beyond. According to a senior US administration official, Oman was removed from its mediation role in negotiations with Iran after the US concluded that Muscat had acted “very duplicitously” during the talks.

Finally, we must approach the prospects of the agreement with caution. It is essential to recognize that this is not a comprehensive peace agreement but rather a transitional framework. The future of the agreement will largely depend on the outcomes of negotiations in the next 60 days. Given that several factions within Iran and Israel are opposed to the agreement, we should not dismiss the possibility of sabotage, particularly from Israel.

Ali Bakir is an assistant professor of international affairs, security, and defense at Qatar University and senior nonresident fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs. Anadolu

Continue reading
Ceasefire And Defeat: Iran Won The War  

By Abdel Bari Atwan

Finally, after 100 days of aggression into which Benjamin Netanyahu dragged the US president into, Donald Trump realized he couldn’t not win the war against Iran, and the chances of defeat were far greater than the chances of victory. Therefore, he decided to surrender and raise the white flag, seeking a way out to minimize losses and save face.

He found what he was looking for in the hands of his Pakistani allies, who offered him a lifeline in the form of a “Memorandum of Understanding” leading to a ceasefire, preventing a regional war of attrition, and forcing him to reluctantly acknowledge Iranian-Omani sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump then turned his arrows toward those who had deceived him—the Israeli occupation state—after beginning to awaken from his stupor and the great deception he had suffered.

Trump might sign this “memorandum” with the leaders of the country whose current Islamic regime he waged war to overthrow, replacing it with a puppet regime, stripping Iran of its nuclear ambitions and more than 460 kilograms of highly enriched uranium—enough to produce 10 nuclear bombs—and, most importantly, acknowledging the unity of the battlefields, thus yielding to Iranian demands the ceasefire encompass all fronts, especially the Lebanese front.

Now the decisions on contentious issues are being postponed, particularly the Iranian nuclear file, and referring them to negotiations that will begin immediately after the ceasefire, along with the gradual lifting of sanctions on Iran for a period of two months, and the unfreezing of tens of billions of dollars of its assets.

These are all concessions reflecting the first fruits of the success of the astute Iranian administration, coupled with a swift military deterrent against any American or Israeli strikes in or around the Strait of Hormuz, and ignoring all of Trump’s empty threats to destroy Iran, wipe it off the face of the earth, and unleash hell upon it.

***

For over two years, Iran negotiated with the United States and European countries regarding its nuclear program and the sensitive issue of uranium enrichment in several capitals, from Vienna to Muscat, Oman, and finally Geneva. It made no concessions whatsoever. Ironically, the head of its negotiating team was Abbas Araqchi, who adhered to the leadership’s ‘yes, but’ approach, which is based on another principle: “We welcome and study” any proposals presented at the negotiating table. As a reward, he was promoted to lead Iranian diplomacy as Foreign Minister in both the previous and current governments.

The Iranian regime possessed many cards, which it used intelligently to counter this Israeli-American aggression. These included the nuclear card and military preparedness based on self-sufficiency in the production of missiles and highly advanced drones. However, one of the most important cards was the unity of the battlefields, support for resistance factions, and the expansion of the conflict into a regional war of attrition.

All these cards yielded results, forcing Trump to resort to the current agreement in a humiliating manner to end the war as quickly as possible. Regardless of whether this memorandum of understanding holds or not, the biggest loser is the Israeli occupation state. This isn’t because it wasn’t consulted or involved, even though it is the true architect and instigator of this war.

Netanyahu, who was reprimanded and labeled insane by his former protégé and “rebellious” servant, Trump, was completely oblivious, searching for information in newspaper reports, television broadcasts, and social media. How things change!

The unity of the battlefields, which embodies one of Iran’s most prominent strategic achievements, and the leadership’s insistence on a complete ceasefire in Lebanon, were the most significant blow to the occupation state.

The American recognition of this unity in the proposed memorandum legitimizes Hezbollah’s existence as a resistance movement, just as it criminalizes the Israeli occupation and its destructive raids. Netanyahu’s acceptance, or rather his acquiescence, to this agreement is a major defeat, while his rejection of it means a direct confrontation with America and its president, and the possibility of being left to act alone in aggression, which would signify an even greater existential defeat.

Netanyahu deceived Trump, leading him into this war like a sheep, convincing him that Iran would collapse as soon as it was bombarded with the first salvo of joint American and Israeli missiles. He led him to believe that tens of millions of Iranians would take to the streets, dancing in celebration of this aggression and demanding the overthrow of the regime.

Yet, the war has dragged on for 100 days, and the results are the opposite. The Iranian Islamic regime is growing stronger and more resilient, reinforcing both territorial and popular unity, and embodying both nuclear and regional sovereignty.

***

We say it without hesitation, with complete frankness and clarity: Trump has been defeated, and the Israeli occupation state is rapidly heading towards collapse, becoming increasingly isolated and hated, especially by its strategic American ally—both the American people and government—who have fallen into the trap of its lies, fabricated information, and blackmail.

This serves Israel’s interests and its racist, terrorist schemes at the expense of America’s own interests, its people, its standing as a superpower claiming leadership of the free world, and the values ​​of justice, democracy, human rights, and global security and stability.

Trump has led America to defeat, whether this agreement holds or not, and this defeat will be clearly confirmed in the American midterm elections next November. We do not rule out that he and his deceiver, Benjamin Netanyahu, will end up behind bars, as prominent symbols of stupidity, criminality, and failure… Time will tell.

Abdul Bari Atwan is the Chief Editor of the Arabic Al Rai Al Youm and his latest article has appeared in the English crossfirearabia.com English website. 

Continue reading
Netanyahu, Iran and The ‘Destructive’ Israeli Personality

By Dr Adnan Naeem

The recent escalation between Israel and Iran suggests that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is currently experiencing one of his most complex and perplexing political moments. The man who has long relied on military force as a tool to resolve conflicts and impose realities now finds himself besieged by outcomes that fall short of his stated objectives and the immense cost borne by the entire region.

In Gaza, after months of war, destruction, and continuous military operations by the Israeli army, fundamental questions remain unanswered: Where is the victory promised to the Israelis? Where are the strategic achievements that justified the continuation of the war? The Gaza battle was transformed from a project for a swift resolution into an open-ended war of attrition, with the political, security, and humanitarian costs increasing daily and rapidly.

As for the northern front (Lebanon), Netanyahu has failed to impose the equations he repeatedly wanted to create. Instead of restoring Israel’s image of deterrence, new realities have emerged confirming that the region does not respond to threats, and that the power balance has become far too complex to be determined by the rhetoric of force or displays of military capability.

At the heart of these shifts, Iran has emerged as a model distinct from the many adversaries Israel has traditionally dealt with. Tehran does not merely declare its right to retaliate; it exercises this right whenever it perceives its interests or sovereignty are threatened. The recent regional confrontations demonstrated that a policy of threats is no longer sufficient to subdue or deter adversaries while military calculations have become far more costly and complex than Netanyahu imagined.

It is to be noted while Netanyahu sometimes speaks of opportunities for negotiation or security and political arrangements, he at the same time continues to generate the conditions for escalation. How can peace be built while the circle of confrontation widens? And how can the world be convinced of the seriousness of the political process when the language of force remains the sole instrument for managing the conflict?

He appears like a cunning fox, claiming to be engaged in negotiations for  peace but focusing on security matters rather than the political file. The security file establishes a limited, relative stability, not a lasting one, waiting to reignite conflict in the region, particularly on the Lebanese front.

Netanyahu works on downplaying and delaying the importance of resolving the political issue first. He thus evades political obligations and commitments under international pressure regarding Lebanese rights for instance, most importantly ( is a complete withdrawal, even from the Shebaa Farms, demarcation of borders, including maritime borders, and Lebanese rights to the gas fields off the Lebanese coast – the Karish field).

This contradiction reveals a crisis deeper than a mere disagreement over military tactics; it reflects a personal political predicament facing Netanyahu. He understands – as he approaches the general elections – that a ceasefire could open the door to domestic accountability regarding security and political failures, and could revive questions about his political future, not to mention corruption cases and crises such as his dismantling of the judicial system and the conscription of Haredim. Therefore, it seems the continuation of the tension gives him more room to maneuver than political compromises would.

Within Israel itself, and as the general elections approaches, the gap between Netanyahu and growing segments of society widens. The opposition is gaining strength, protests continue unabated and the families of fallen and wounded soldiers are raising their voices in an unprecedented manner. Meanwhile, criticism is mounting from security and military figures who believe the government lacks a clear vision to resolve the crisis.

Today, Netanyahu’s image resembles that of his missiles: Soaring into the sky, creating a deafening roar, but quickly returning to reality, where difficult questions and stubborn facts await him. Wars may postpone crises, but they do not eliminate them, and escalation may temporarily alter the landscape, but it does not create a lasting victory.

Conversely, the United States appears more inclined toward de-escalation and preventing the region from erupting into a full-blown war. Washington understands its strategic interests require containing the conflict, not expanding it. It prefers pursuing political and security arrangements that reduce the likelihood of a major confrontation. However, this approach clashes with Netanyahu’s desire to keep the region on the brink of conflagration, hoping to alter the facts on the ground or escape the demands of domestic politics.

Between heaven and earth, Netanyahu oscillates between the rhetoric of power and the reality of impotence, between his political ambitions and the limits of what military force can achieve. As for the region, it continues to pay the price for this oscillation, which has so far produced nothing but more tension and instability.

This article, written by Dr Adnan Naeem, an Israeli affairs expert, was published in the Arabic  Maannews website and reprinted in crossfirearabia.com

Continue reading