Israel’s Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request to lift a freeze on his government’s decision to dismiss Ronen Bar, head of the Shin Bet security agency, official media reported.
The court, the nation’s highest judicial body, ruled that Bar cannot be removed before April 8, when justices will review opposition petitions challenging the dismissal, Israel’s public broadcaster KAN reported according to Anadolu.
However, the court permitted Netanyahu to interview candidates for Bar’s replacement.
Last Friday, Netanyahu’s government decided to end Bar’s tenure on April 10, unless a permanent successor is appointed earlier.
The Supreme Court then issued a temporary injunction halting the move until the April 8 hearing, following petitions from opposition parties and NGOs.
These groups, including Yesh Atid, National Unity, Yisrael Beytenu, the Democrats, and the Movement for Quality Government, argued the dismissal reflects a “serious conflict of interest” tied to Shin Bet investigations involving Netanyahu and the agency’s report blaming the government for the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack.
Netanyahu defended his push to oust Bar, asserting the decision falls within governmental authority and should not be subject to judicial oversight.
He cited a “lack of trust” in Bar, rooted in the fallout from the Oct. 7, 2023 attack. This marks the first time an Israeli government has moved to fire a Shin Bet chief.
Bar himself hinted at political motives, suggesting Netanyahu sought “personal loyalty” he refused to provide. Meanwhile, massive protests have gripped Israeli streets in recent days, decrying the dismissal attempt.
Israel’s decision to cut off all humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip until further notice is deeply concerning. This dangerous escalation exacerbates the ongoing humanitarian crisis and weaponises starvation as a tool of genocide. The decision coincides with increasingly inflammatory statements by Israeli officials, underscoring a deliberate intent to continue Israel’s crime of genocide by depriving Palestinians of their most basic needs and imposing conditions that threaten their survival.
The Israeli government announced on Sunday a total blockade on humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, shutting all border crossings. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also publicly declared plans for “further consequences,” disregarding the dire humanitarian crisis affecting over two million people.
— Abdel-Kader Muhtadie عبد القادر سعيد المهتدي (@akmuhtadie) March 5, 2025
Humanitarian aid is a fundamental right of civilians under international humanitarian law, with no exceptions, and there is no legal justification for Israel to deny Palestinians access to essential aid. Israel is not only using humanitarian aid as a bargaining chip for political and military gain, but is also deliberately enforcing a policy of systematic starvation, creating life-threatening conditions designed to make survival in the Gaza Strip impossible.
Israel’s repeated statements announcing its full coordination with the United States administration, which has explicitly stated its intention to displace the Strip’s entire population, confirm that the crimes of starvation and blocking of humanitarian aid are not isolated incidents or negotiating tools. Instead, they are part of a deliberate plan aligned with the US strategy to forcefully displace and depopulate the Gaza Strip.
Euro-Med Monitor warns that statements by Israeli ministers and Knesset members reveal a premeditated intent to exterminate the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip. International silence has allowed Israel and the US to move beyond threats and implement the total cut-off of humanitarian aid, advancing the 16-month genocide through blockade and starvation, with apparent impunity.
Most of the statements made by senior Israeli officials, including one on opening “the gates of hell” on the enclave and blocking all humanitarian aid to its residents, coupled with Israel’s actions on the ground, amount to direct and public incitement to genocide. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared that halting the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza is an “important step in the right direction,” further stating that Israel must “open those gates as quickly and lethally as possible on the cruel enemy, until absolute victory”.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar dismissed warnings from the United Nations and international organisations regarding the risk of renewed famine in the Gaza Strip amid the tightened blockade and halting of humanitarian aid. Sa’ar said he considered these warnings to be “just a lie” and affirmed that the Israeli government has no commitment to delivering humanitarian aid.
Additionally, Israeli Knesset member and former Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir has declared that now is the best time to “open the gates of hell” and cut off electricity and water supplies to the Gaza Strip, urging continued efforts to implement plans for the forcible displacement of its residents. Israeli Knesset member Almog Cohen urged Israeli forces to kill Palestinians in Gaza “with no mercy” during the holy month of Ramadan, saying it “is the best time to kill them because they are weak and tired”.
The intention to commit genocide has been publicly expressed by the Israeli government and members of the mainstream Israeli media since the beginning of the genocide in Gaza on 7 October 2023, and even before that. Israeli Minister of Religious Services, Matan Kahana, previously voiced his wish to be able to “press a button” to expel all Palestinians. Following 7 October, genocidal rhetoric surged and making statements containing such rhetoric became a daily routine for senior Israeli officials, including the infamous statement by former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant: “We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza. There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel, everything will be closed. We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.”
The inflammatory statements by Israeli officials could pave the way for an escalation of the genocide in the Gaza Strip, including in the conditions Israel has created to cause the physical destruction of the Palestinian population in whole or in part. The deliberate worsening of these conditions is being implemented through the ongoing blockade and denial of humanitarian aid, following over 15 months of relentless aggression targeting civilian facilities, infrastructure, hospitals, schools, and all aspects of daily life.
Israel’s blocking of humanitarian aid constitutes a war of starvation against the residents of the Gaza Strip, as they are entirely dependent on this aid for sustenance. Notably, the United Nations confirmed three days ago that there are many difficulties in delivering aid to residents of the Strip, and that the humanitarian conditions there have reached catastrophic levels.
Not only did Israel inflict widespread killing and massive destruction on the Gaza Strip for over 15 months, but it continues to implement policies that will effectively lead to the death of the Palestinian population without swift international intervention. This includes the ongoing Israeli policy of gradual killing of Palestinians through a comprehensive illegal blockade that obstructs the flow of humanitarian aid and essential materials, prevents the repair of vital infrastructure, and halts the provision of basic services necessary for the population’s survival.
Euro-Med Monitor emphasises that this Israeli policy can only be interpreted as a deliberate act of genocide as defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which prohibits imposing living conditions on a group with the intent to destroy it, in whole or in part. Despite the ceasefire, Israel has continued to create conditions likely to result in the physical destruction of Palestinians in the long term, given the comprehensive nature of its actions, which affect all aspects of Palestinians’ lives, particularly due to the prolonged duration for which they have been subjected to such conditions.
All relevant states and entities must fulfil their legal responsibilities and take immediate action to halt the genocide in the Gaza Strip, compel Israel and the United States to adherence to international law, and implement effective measures to protect Palestinians from US-Israeli plans of slow killing and forced displacement. This includes activating an urgent response to meet the immediate needs of the population, resuming the unrestricted entry of all humanitarian aid, removing any blockades or restrictions that hinder ongoing relief efforts, and ensuring the provision of essential services such as healthcare, water, education, and temporary, adequate housing.
Euro-Med Monitor urges the international community to fulfill its legal and humanitarian responsibilities by ensuring the implementation of the International Court of Justice’s ruling on 28 March 2024. This includes the issuance of precautionary measures requiring Israel to take necessary and effective actions, in cooperation with the United Nations, to guarantee the unobstructed and timely entry of aid into the Gaza Strip, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention.
Erkul’s illustrations blend satire with activism, highlighting injustice of the Palestinians. Whether addressing war, disaster, or political hypocrisy, Erkul’s art amplifies the voices of the silenced.
By Yusuf Kamadan
A slice of watermelon pierced by knives. A faceless figure in a suit, draped in the American flag, steering a cart off a cliff and into the flames. A set of scales, balancing Hitler on one side, Netanyahu on the other. A shapeless globe, caught in the grip of a monstrous, many-limbed octopus.
These are the unmistakable images of Muammer Erkul, the Turkish illustrator and journalist whose work—at once bold, unflinching, and darkly satirical—has spread widely across the social media. His drawings do not whisper; they speak loudly.
The satire is biting, but the implications are serious. At a time when many artists sidestep controversy, wary of political consequences, Erkul embraces it.
“I have an idea and I want to convey it to the other party. I want to pass on my feelings. One of the most effective ways to do this is to draw a cartoon,” he says.
His illustrations have become a kind of visual journalism, a counter-narrative to the political abstractions that often obscure the human cost of war.
With sharp lines and unflinching commentary, Erkul captures the resilience of Palestinians amid oppression.
Since the 1970s, Erkul has carved out a space for himself in Turkish newspapers and magazines, his work known for its wit, precision, and unrelenting social critique.
His drawings do not merely document suffering; they bear witness.
Scenes of bombed-out homes, grieving mothers, children clutching stones — his work captures the devastating realities of occupation while also portraying the quiet, stubborn resilience of a people who refuse to be erased.
“Millions of Palestinians have lost everything — their homes, their families, their lives,” Erkul says. “More than 150,000 bodies have been destroyed, and 50,000 of them have been martyred—most of them children and women.”
His words, much like his art, do not flinch from the brutal arithmetic of war. Beyond his artistic talent, Erkul has always used his work as a platform to address important issues.
Erkul’s art merges satire with activism, amplifying the voices of the oppressed through powerful imagery.
Why cartoons?
For Erkul, caricature is more than just a humorous art form; it is a means of resistance.
“Caricature is the easiest and most effective way to explain some things,” Erkul says. “A cartoon is drawn in a day and understood in an instant. It’s like the longest-range missile, and it sticks to its target.”
In an age of social media, where information moves at a breakneck pace, this immediacy is crucial. A single drawing, shared widely, can cut through the noise in ways that editorials and essays often cannot.
“I have an idea, and I want to convey it,” he says simply. “One of the most effective ways to do this is to draw a cartoon.”
Erkul has long been engaged in magazine publishing, serving as the editor-in-chief of Divanyolu, a cultural and literary magazine, until 2018.
Following the devastating 2023 earthquake, he shared his artwork on social media and made it freely available to magazines, believing that art can serve as a powerful tool for remembrance.
Reflecting on the disaster, Erkul described it as one of the most catastrophic earthquakes in history, emphasising its unprecedented scale and impact.
He recalled the initial shock and fear that gripped him, along with the overwhelming sense of helplessness. Wanting to contribute in a meaningful way, he turned to his art, realizing that while the disaster would eventually fade from public memory, visual documentation could ensure that future generations would not forget.
Early in his career, his cartoons blended humor with cultural commentary, but over time, his focus sharpened, his pen increasingly turned toward the struggles of the Palestinian people.
A single cartoon can convey what words cannot — Erkul’s work strikes at the heart of injustice with visual precision.
“Art is not neutral; it must take a side”
Erkul is not just chronicling injustice, he is building solidarity.
His illustrations are not just critiques; they are rallying cries. Erkul’s work does more than capture the suffering of Palestinians — it interrogates the machinery that sustains it.
His cartoons often expose the uneasy entanglements between Western nations and Israeli aggression.
“Everyone knows the closeness of the US and Israel,” he says. “But never in any period of history has this secret game been played so openly. It’s a chicken-and-egg story — an Israeli egg hatches from an American chicken, an American chick hatches from an Israeli egg, grows up, and lays Israeli eggs again.”
He believes artists have a responsibility to engage, to use their platforms to amplify the struggles of the voiceless. In his view, art is not neutral. It must take a side.
For Erkul, that side has always been clear: art is not just a means of entertainment; it is an act of defiance against injustice.
Art is not neutral; Erkul uses his pen as a tool of defiance against global injustice.
In his view, every artist has a responsibility to stand for justice and use their craft to fight against oppression.
His work is particularly significant in an era where digital media spreads messages rapidly, ensuring that his depictions of Palestinian suffering and resilience reach a global audience.
His legacy is not just one of artistic achievement, but of moral conviction.
His pen, like the voices of Palestinian poets, filmmakers, and musicians, is a tool for preserving memory, for fighting erasure. He firmly believes that the more artists engage with these issues, the stronger the message becomes.
“The more cartoonists and artists we have, the stronger our ideas will be,” he says.
The Israeli government issued a tender to build nearly 1,000 settlement units in the occupied West Bank, an anti-settlement group said on Monday.
The Peace Now group, an Israeli watchdog that monitors settlement building in the West Bank, said 974 additional settler homes will be built in Efrat settlement south of Bethlehem city.
It warned that the construction of an entire neighborhood in the Efrat settlement “blocks the development of the Bethlehem metropolis to the south, and if Israel seeks to annex it to Israel, it will cut off the entire southern West Bank,” according to Anadolu.
The Israeli organization accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of harming Israel’s interests and undermining the two-state solution through imposing realities on the ground.
“While the people of Israel sets their sights on the release of the hostages and an end to the war, the Netanyahu government is operating ‘on steroids’ to establish facts on the ground that will destroy the chance for peace and compromise,” it said.
Nineteen Israeli captives and five Thai workers have been released in exchange for 1,135 Palestinian prisoners under a Gaza ceasefire agreement that took effect on Jan. 19.
The international community, including the UN, considers the Israeli settlements illegal under international law. The UN has repeatedly warned that continued settlement expansion threatens the viability of a two-state solution, a framework seen as key to resolving the decades-long Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice declared Israel’s decades-long occupation of Palestinian land illegal and demanded the evacuation of all existing settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Immediately upon his return to the White House for a second stint, a hawkish Donald Trump has put Iran on notice.
In the first week of February, the US President signed a presidential decree reinstating the maximum pressure policy on Iran, saying that though he was not pleased with the decision, he had no choice but to adopt a firm stance.
A few days later, Trump claimed that a very “frightened” Iran was ready for a deal with the US over the Shia-majority nation’s nuclear programme.
The moot point of his assertion was that he would also prefer a deal rather than Israel carrying its threat of attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. “I’d much rather do a deal that’s not going to hurt them.”
Since Trump assumed office, Iranian officials have consistently voiced their support for dialogue and expressed a willingness to engage in negotiations with the new administration.
On January 14, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reaffirmed this position in an interview with NBC, emphasising Iran’s openness to talks.
However, any potential for a dialogue appeared to have been decisively shut down following a February 7 statement by Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.
Addressing members of the Iranian military, Khamenei declared that engaging in negotiations with the US was neither a prudent nor an honourable course of action, unequivocally rejecting the prospect of talks between the two countries.
Some analysts have interpreted Trump’s January approval of the sale of 4,700 additional MK-84 bunker-buster bombs to Israel as part of a broader Iran strategy.
This begs the question: How would Iran-US relations evolve under Trump, and how significant is the threat posed by Iran’s potential nuclear capabilities?
Trump’s re-election marks a critical turning point for Iran. Even during his first presidency, Trump’s policy of maximum pressure had led to significant economic, political, and military challenges for Tehran.
It was during the first Trump administration that some seismic events – such as the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal, the re-imposition of economic sanctions, and the assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani—intensified the pressure on Iran.
With Trump’s re-election, the Iranian leadership is concerned about the prospect of further escalation of previous policies.
Recent developments in the region indicate that Iran’s deterrence capabilities have reached a critical low.
An analysis of Iran’s national security and defence doctrine reveals that it rests on three principal strategic pillars: the establishment of a forward defence line via non-state actors under the Quds Force, an extensive missile programme, and efforts to achieve nuclear threshold status.
However, Israel’s attacks in 2023 and 2024 have significantly weakened these pillars. Indeed, the elimination of Hezbollah leaders, the destruction of its command structures, and successful Israeli airstrikes against Iranian territory have complicated Iran’s ability to leverage these elements as an effective deterrent.
Moreover, although Iran’s missile programme is still impressive in terms of variety and quantity, its effectiveness was found to be limited during the April and October 2024 attacks. The majority of Iran’s missiles either missed their targets or proved ineffective.
The Israeli strikes on October 26 severely damaged Iran’s missile engine production facilities and solid fuel production capabilities.
In particular, the strikes on the Shahroud missile complex have significantly constrained Iran’s ability to develop long-range missiles. As a result of these strikes, Iran’s most advanced air defence systems (S-300 PMU2) were rendered inoperable.
The remaining systems are limited both in range and capability, thereby increasing Iran’s vulnerability to external attacks. These vulnerabilities have prompted Tehran to reconsider the option of developing nuclear weapons.
While Iran has the capability to produce weapons-grade uranium within a week, integrating a nuclear warhead into a missile system is regarded as a time-consuming process.
Iran’s nuclear programme and rising concerns
Trump’s threats and the continuing tensions surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme represent a critical juncture for the country.
Rather than initiating the production of nuclear weapons, Tehran could adopt the more cautious yet effective step of announcing its intention to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Such a move would underscore Iran’s seriousness while seeking to extract more concessions at the negotiating table.
A notable example is North Korea, which in 1993 employed a similar strategy by announcing its intention to withdraw from the treaty, subsequently suspending its decision before ultimately carrying it out.
Iran’s threat to withdraw from the NPT could be perceived by the international community as a shift toward nuclear weapons production. This, in turn, could escalate regional tensions and potentially encourage Israel to deploy US-made bunker-buster bombs against Iranian nuclear facilities.
Iran’s clandestine nuclear weapons programme, known as the Amad Plan, sought to produce five nuclear weapons between 1999 and 2003.
Under this plan, four warheads for Shahab-3 ballistic missiles and one bomb for an underground test were developed.
According to the Iranian nuclear archive captured by Israel in 2018, Iran has made significant advances in critical technologies, including nuclear warhead design, neutron initiators, and detonation focusing systems. This information is regarded as a contributing factor to Iran’s increased capacity to produce nuclear weapons.
Significant similarities exist between China’s first nuclear bomb (codenamed 596) and Iran’s early designs. The findings indicate that Iran is approaching the status of a nuclear threshold state.
Therefore, Trump’s nuclear policy toward Iran is a critical issue, both in terms of differing perspectives within his administration and the broader international context.
Where can the process evolve?
Iran’s nuclear programme remains a priority concern for both Europe and the US.
With the expiration of the UN Security Council (UNSC) snapback sanctions in October 2025, the US-led West risks losing one of its most powerful tools of diplomatic leverage.
In this context, Europe plans to leverage Iran’s vulnerabilities and time constraints to initiate an effective nuclear diplomacy process.
Indeed, a statement by the E3 – France, Germany and the UK – that it is prepared to utilise all diplomatic tools against Iran indicates that patience is waning.
Simultaneously, Iran’s statements suggesting it may reassess its technical capabilities and political intentions have raised concerns within the international community.
The US might intensify pressure by tightening the enforcement of secondary sanctions on the Iranian economy.
As an initial measure, Trump imposed sanctions on a key international network involved in the sale of Iranian oil, delivering a significant blow to Iran’s oil exports.
Expanding sanctions to target major purchasers of Iranian oil, particularly China, could exacerbate Iran’s economic vulnerabilities.
In other words, the US and Europe may capitalise on this window of opportunity by intensifying pressure on Iran while simultaneously presenting clear diplomatic solutions.
In Iran, contrary to Khamenei’s rhetoric, there are indications that a large section of the leadership and population are generally supportive of negotiations with the US.
Recently, the Center for Islamic World Studies, aligned with Supreme Leader Khamenei, conducted a survey on Iran-US negotiations as part of its advisory role in foreign policy.
The study surveyed 119 academics, senior executives, and current and former officials. The results revealed that 86.5 percent of respondents supported direct negotiations between Iran and the Trump administration, while just 5.8 percent opposed the proposal. A further 7.5 percent of respondents indicated that negotiations would be conditional.
Against the backdrop of Trump’s belligerence against Iran, the risk of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities has gone up manifold.
How Tehran decides to navigate the choppy waters of uncertainty will determine the future of US-Iran relations. And, perhaps, of the volatile region too.
CrossFireArabia
