‘US Presidents Know The Rules’ –  Israeli Historian Ilan Pappé 

Ilan Pappé is an Israeli historian and a political scientist and now is a lecturer at the University of Exeter in the UK. In 2008 he left Israel after receiving death threats about his view on the Palestinian question as member of “Israel’s New Historians” which questioned the official narrative that Palestinians left of their own free will in 1948. He says on the contrary, there was a systematic attempt by Israeli leaders to drive them out of their lands. Subsequently more than 750,000 Palestinians were forced out and made into refugees.

In the following short videoclip he offers a sussinct view of US foreign policy and how American foreign policy from at least Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama and now Joe Biden with their “tunnel-support” permanent pro-Israel.

“…So when people say why does Biden so automatically supports Israel he knows the rules, he knows what happened to anyone who even dare to slightly, like Obama, or Carter, anyone who slightly challenged. What happened to them?,” Pappé said.

“You read Obama’s Memour’s, you can see how he said ‘I suddenly understood any word  I am saying on Israel can bring down [the US] Congress.  

Pappé  said Obama admitted when he commented “I could not be loyal to my basic instinct which is to be pro-Palestinians. Because I wouldn’t be a president.”

  • 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

    Netanyahu and The Settlers: Cart and Horse in Action

    By Mohammad Abu Rumman

    Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the latest events in the West Bank was not what the settlers did — that is hardly new or unexpected — but what Benjamin Netanyahu himself said. The Israeli prime minister denounced the “criminal acts of violence” committed by settlers in the villages of Qusra and Jalud, describing those responsible as a “handful of rioters” whose actions harm law-abiding settlers, interfere with the army’s work, and damage Israel’s standing in the world. This is precisely where the paradox lies: What exactly is Netanyahu condemning? Do the settlers’ actions really contradict his government’s policies, or do they ultimately serve the same project, albeit through different means and methods?

    What is happening in the West Bank did not begin over the past few days, nor with the latest attacks. It has been developing for years along a clear trajectory, one that has accelerated dramatically under the current government and since the Gaza war. The United Nations has documented unprecedented levels of settler violence, with more than 1,430 attacks this year affecting some 260 Palestinian communities. Nearly 3,800 Palestinians have been displaced in 2026 as a result of settler violence, demolitions and evictions. These figures cannot simply be viewed as a collection of isolated security incidents; they point to a much deeper transformation taking place on the ground.

    Settler violence, in fact, is only one part of a much larger picture. Nearly a thousand checkpoints, barriers, gates, and roadblocks now fragment the West Bank, turning everyday Palestinian life into a continuous struggle with geography, time, permits, and restrictions. In the northern West Bank, the situation has become even more severe, with tens of thousands displaced from the Jenin, Tulkarm and Nur Shams refugee camps, alongside extensive demolitions, bulldozing, and the physical reshaping of these areas.

    The E1 settlement project takes the issue to another, more strategic level. Moving forward with E1 would effectively sever geographical continuity between the northern and southern West Bank and further isolate East Jerusalem, making the prospect of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state increasingly detached from realities on the ground. Add to this the transfer of significant powers within the Civil Administration to the authority of Bezalel Smotrich, who has made no secret of his objective of preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state; the empowerment of Itamar Ben-Gvir; repeated incursions into Al Aqsa Mosque and attempts to alter the long-standing status quo; settlement expansion; and a broader set of legislative and administrative measures moving in the same direction. What emerges is not a series of disconnected policies, but an integrated effort to determine the future of the West Bank on the ground before any political settlement can take place.

    Against this backdrop, Netanyahu’s reference to a “handful of rioters” becomes difficult to take seriously. It suggests that the settlers operate in a political vacuum or somehow act against the direction set by the government and the state. Yet, however chaotic and violent their actions may appear, the outcome converges with a clearly defined political project: Pushing Palestinians away from their land, expanding settler control, fragmenting Palestinian geography and effectively closing the door on the possibility of a Palestinian state.

    The real explanation for Netanyahu’s condemnation may therefore lie in his own words: these attacks, he said, “damage Israel’s standing in the world”. That sentence reveals the essence of the problem from his perspective. The concern appears to be less about the direction of these actions than about their method and image; less about their political consequences than about their transformation into openly violent scenes captured by international media — as happened when an NBC News crew itself came under attack by settlers — at a moment when Israel’s international image has become increasingly associated with the Gaza war, settlement expansion, and settler violence.

    Netanyahu’s condemnation can therefore be understood as carrying a dual message. To the outside world, it says that the Israeli government neither endorses nor approves of such violence, even as its policies on the ground move in broadly the same direction. To the domestic audience, the message may be that what is required is not necessarily a change of course, but a more disciplined and calculated management of that course — one that does not further inflame the mounting crisis surrounding Israel’s international image and standing.

    This is why Netanyahu’s condemnation is itself worthy of condemnation. The problem in the West Bank has long ceased to be simply a group of extremist settlers acting beyond the state’s control. It is part of a political project in which government policy, settlement expansion, security measures, legislation, and the Civil Administration increasingly converge to reshape the territory and demography of the West Bank and create realities that will be exceedingly difficult to reverse.

    When Netanyahu finds himself condemning the natural consequences of a project that his own government has done so much to accelerate, the paradox becomes impossible to miss: He is not merely condemning the settlers. In effect, Netanyahu is condemning himself.

    By Mohammad Abu Rumman is a columnist in The Jordan Times.

    Continue reading
    Flying Kites and The Politics of Fear

    By Dr Oroub El-Abed

    There is something profoundly unsettling about a military power becoming alarmed by children flying kites:

    In Gaza, where childhood has already been stripped of so many of its ordinary meanings, even a kite has now entered the vocabulary of warfare. In August 2026, several kites drifted from Gaza toward Israeli communities near the border. Israel’s own military reported that the kites it recovered carried no suspicious material and posed no danger. Yet Israeli leaders responded by treating their appearance as a potential act of war. Defence Minister Israel Katz announced that a balloon would be treated like a kite and a kite like a drone, “with or without explosives.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Katz subsequently warned that those responsible could be targeted and that populations could be evacuated from areas identified as launch sites.

    By 25 August, Palestinian committees in Gaza were asking parents to prevent their children from flying kites, not because kites themselves had become dangerous, but because the children holding their strings might become targets. One mother told Reuters that her ten-year-old son had always flown kites during the summer but that she would no longer allow him to do so.

    The gravity of that moment

    There is, of course, a history that cannot simply be erased. During Gaza’s Great March of Return beginning in 2018, incendiary kites and balloons were used by Palestinians and caused fires in agricultural fields inside Israel. Activists have examined those incendiary devices as an unusual form of anti-colonial resistance, while Israel characterised them as terrorism and a security threat. But recognising that history makes the present distinction more important, rather than less important. The kites now causing alarm were reportedly not incendiary: a children’s kite is equated with an armed drone, the category of “security threat” expands almost without limit.

    Every aspect of Palestinian life has become securitised.

    Even a woman in labour at a checkpoint, carrying a newborn into the world, is subjected to the same architecture of suspicion and control. A neighbourhood can be transformed overnight into a military zone following an act of resistance. And now even the sky above a displacement camp, entered only by a child’s kite, can be drawn into this expanding geography of securitisation.

    Shrinking of the spaces in which Palestinians can safely live ordinary lives

    Across the occupied West Bank, settler attacks have intensified. In July 2026, the UN human rights office warned of escalating settler violence, killings, destruction of property and attacks affecting Palestinian communities. OCHA has documented assaults on homes, restrictions on agricultural land, damage to livestock and olive trees, intimidation and displacement, particularly around newly established settlement outposts.

    The International Court of Justice concluded in its July 2024 advisory opinion that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful and found its settlement policies and associated practices in breach of international law. Yet territorial expansion continues while Palestinians possess overwhelmingly unequal military and political means with which to resist it.

    Historical continuity that deserves examination.

    The connection between Zionists Guerrilla attacks during the British Mandate and the present, is not that history simply repeats itself. The Zionists operations continue to be inhumane, savage and far from civilised,  territorial expansion remains remarkably persistent.  From the depopulated villages documented by Walid Khalidi, to the history of transfer examined by Nur Masalha, to Edward Said’s insistence on recovering the Palestinian standpoint, and Rashid Khalidi’s account of a century-long colonial confrontation, Palestinian scholarship provides its own intellectual vocabulary for understanding what we are witnessing today: displacement is an unfinished process of contesting Palestinian presence on the land. The problem today is that intimidation, territorial acquisition and displacement continue to interact at a regional level as well.

    Israeli military actions have extended repeatedly into Lebanon and Syria, including recent strikes in Syria, creating an increasingly dangerous geography in which borders no longer insulate neighbouring populations from Israeli military power. The language is invariably security. Yet for the people experiencing bombing, displacement, occupation or territorial encroachment, “security” looks remarkably different depending on which side of military power one inhabits.

    And perhaps this is why the kite is so revealing. The kite made of plastic bags carries almost nothing. It is fragile. It is made to rise, not conquer. For a child surrounded by destroyed buildings and displacement tents, flying one may represent one of the few remaining possibilities of movement. The child’s body is confined; the kite is not.

    Perhaps that is precisely why the reaction to it deserves our attention. Children cannot be asked to surrender childhood because an occupying military power has progressively widened its definition of threat. The most disturbing image coming from Gaza this week may therefore be neither a missile nor a tank: It may be a mother telling her child:

    Do not fly your kite. They may see it.

    That sentence should disturb the conscience of the world. Because when even a child’s kite becomes too dangerous to fly, what is being taken away is more than a toy. It is the remaining space in which a Palestinian child is permitted simply to be a child.

    Dr Oroub El-Abed originally wrote this piece for Middle East Monitor and is reposted here in crossfirearabia.com. She is an Associate Professor at Bir Zeit University and specializes in refugees issues.

    Continue reading

    You Missed

    Netanyahu and The Settlers: Cart and Horse in Action

    Netanyahu and The Settlers: Cart and Horse in Action

    Pupils From The Bishop’s School, Jerusalem

    • By Heba
    • August 30, 2026
    • 14 views
    Pupils From The Bishop’s School, Jerusalem

    Jerusalem’s Mamilla in The 1940s

    • By marwan
    • August 30, 2026
    • 14 views
    Jerusalem’s Mamilla in The 1940s

    Volunteers Collect Stones From Destroyed Mosque To Rebuild it in The Future

    • By marwan
    • August 30, 2026
    • 15 views
    Volunteers Collect Stones From Destroyed Mosque To Rebuild it in The Future

    Destitution Gaza: Girl With The Child

    • By marwan
    • August 30, 2026
    • 12 views
    Destitution Gaza: Girl With The Child

    Omer Bartov: ‘Its Genocide’

    Omer Bartov: ‘Its Genocide’