The region is witnessing intense diplomatic activity coinciding with escalating military tensions between Tehran and Washington, as indirect negotiations aim to contain the specter of a comprehensive confrontation. These moves come at a time when both sides are exchanging symbolic signals that reflect the complex nature of the conflict, whether through political channels or by demonstrating military power in regional waters.

In the Iranian capital, striking military implications emerged with the appearance of a model of the advanced Chinese fighter jet 'J-20' as a gift from the Chinese military attaché to the commander of the Iranian Air Force. This step is interpreted in political circles as a message of technical and military support from Beijing to Tehran, amid increasing Western pressure and continuous Israeli threats to vital facilities.

On the other hand, American movements recorded a notable presence in the Arabian Sea, where presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner visited the aircraft carrier 'Abraham Lincoln'. The American delegation was accompanied by the commander of Central Command, who later participated in the round of indirect negotiations hosted by Muscat last Friday, linking the diplomatic track with direct military presence.

In the Sultanate of Oman, media sources monitored precise details during the meeting of the Omani Foreign Minister with the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, where files described as important appeared between the two parties. These meetings reflect the pivotal role played by Muscat as a key mediator in bringing viewpoints closer and attempting to formulate initial understandings to prevent a slide towards war.

Domestically in Iran, Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi quickly held high-level meetings with Iranian army commanders immediately after the conclusion of the talks in Muscat. This coordination aims to inform the military establishment of political developments and ensure the readiness of the armed forces to deal with any emergency scenarios that the nature of the stalled negotiations might impose.

Despite ongoing diplomatic efforts to pave the way for a potential agreement, the American military buildup in waters near Iran continues to cast a shadow over the scene. The state of anticipation for what the coming days will bring continues, amid the intertwining of nuclear and regional issues with the ambitions of the new American administration to reshape the balance of power in the region.

Between diplomacy and the specter of war, efforts continue to pave the way for negotiations while military mobilization in the region persists.

Responsible sources in the White House revealed a decisive stance by US President Donald Trump regarding the West Bank issue, where he clearly affirmed his opposition to any moves aimed at its annexation by the occupation authorities. The sources indicated that this position has been communicated to the relevant parties to ensure that no unilateral steps are taken that could lead to an uncalculated explosion of the political and security situation in the region.

The American official stated that Trump's vision stems from the conviction that any annexation decision would necessarily undermine the gains achieved during the past period within the regional de-escalation tracks. The White House believes that maintaining de-escalation channels requires avoiding major decisions that could end future stability opportunities and push the region towards a new wave of comprehensive escalation.

In the context of the security justifications for this stance, leaks from the US administration emphasized that a stable West Bank represents the core security interests of the occupation at present. Officials in Washington warned that the absence of stability would turn the region into a permanent attrition zone, which could negatively impact the deterrence capability of the Israeli military and security establishment.

The sources also clarified that this approach is not a retreat from Trump's previous policies, but rather consistent with the fundamental principles of the peace plan he proposed, which is essentially based on enforcing security and preventing major crises. The US administration believes that sliding towards annexation decisions will create a ground reality whose outcomes are difficult to predict or whose security and political repercussions are hard to control.

These surprising statements come to exert new pressure on the occupation government, which had been banking on absolute American support for expansion projects in the West Bank. These positions are expected to reshape the political movement in the region, especially in light of Washington's emphasis that the top priority currently is to prevent chaos and ensure the West Bank remains far from scenarios of field explosion.

President Trump clearly stated that he does not support the occupation's annexation of the West Bank, based on his comprehensive vision for the region.

The delay in the arrival of the national committee formed to manage the Gaza Strip and assume its duties is a deliberate Israeli political decision, not merely a routine procedural or administrative detail. This obstruction falls within the context of the fait accompli policy pursued by the occupation authorities, aiming to keep crises ongoing and persistent to serve their vision for the beleaguered Strip.

The latest developments raise a fundamental question about who will manage Gaza in the next phase, especially given the occupation's claim of searching for an administrative alternative. However, facts on the ground indicate that Israel is the primary party obstructing any Palestinian formula capable of organizing public affairs, even if it is a professional, independent committee.

The presence of a Palestinian technocratic committee on the ground necessarily means the end of the Israeli narrative promoting the absence of administration in Gaza. This path restores the possibility of Palestinian governance and imposes its political entitlements, which fundamentally contradicts the occupation's goals of keeping the region ungovernable.

Through preventing the committee, the occupation seeks to turn Gaza into an area open to permanent chaos, thereby facilitating long-term goals, foremost among them the displacement of Palestinians. The Israeli prevention does not target individuals themselves, but rather the idea of a national administrative authority capable of organizing relief and essential services.

Chaos, from the Israeli perspective, is a strategic tool to perpetuate control and achieve political gains, not merely an incidental result of military operations. This policy aims to push the population towards coercive and bitter choices, starting with accepting externally imposed administrations and ending with forced displacement under the weight of necessity.

The repercussions of this prevention extend to the humanitarian depth, as the absence of a central administration opens the door to difficulties in the delivery of humanitarian aid in the required quantities and qualities. The occupation has so far evaded implementing the agreed-upon entitlements, creating a state of confusion in the distribution of roles among international and local relief organizations.

This obstruction coincides with a systematic plan to marginalize UNRWA in preparation for ending its existence, in addition to restricting the most prominent international humanitarian organizations operating in the sector. This vacuum gives the occupation and its armed gangs an opportunity to exploit people's needs and turn relief into a means of influence and illicit competition.

The absence of a national administrative regulator leads to the creation of a dangerous security and social vacuum, followed by the outbreak of local conflicts over limited available resources. This situation contributes to the erosion of trust in any unifying national project and directly serves efforts to internationalize Gaza's administration from a purely humanitarian perspective, far from national rights.

Turning the conflict into merely a humanitarian crisis aims to strip Palestinian owners of their political decision and present external guardianship as the sole and inevitable solution. This deliberate disregard for the right of the population to manage their lives and future requires urgent national and international action to break the Israeli restrictions imposed on the administrative committee.

Overcoming these obstacles requires imposing a national political vision with effective communication mechanisms with mediators and sponsoring states of agreements. The committee must adhere to its inherent right to access the Gaza Strip and carry out its duties from within Palestinian territories, while turning the issue of its prevention into a legal case in international forums.

Preventing the committee's arrival is a clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, which guarantee the freedom of humanitarian and administrative work for populations under occupation. Silence on these transgressions gives the occupation a green light to continue its policy of administrative obfuscation and destruction of the infrastructure of Palestinian society in Gaza.

The responsibility does not lie with the occupation alone; success in empowering the committee requires a unified national stance that avoids dual discourse or disputes over legitimacy. Clear popular support is an essential pillar for turning the committee's arrival into an urgent societal demand that no party can bypass or circumvent.

The active Arab role, specifically the role of the Arab Republic of Egypt, is prominent here in pressuring the occupation to facilitate the committee's entry and permanently open the crossings. Arab coordination must aim to enable the Palestinian administration to fully supervise the relief file, away from the channels that the occupation tries to impose.

In conclusion, the battle for the arrival of the administrative committee represents a new chapter in the conflict over the identity of governance and the future of the Gaza Strip after the war. The choice today lies between an organized Palestinian administration that preserves human dignity and rights, or deliberate chaos that serves the political projects of the occupation, and the bet remains on solid national will.

Chaos, from the Israeli occupation's perspective, is not an incidental result of the war; rather, it is a tool to perpetuate control and achieve goals, and a lever to push the population towards coercive choices.

Discourse strategy is one of the fundamental pillars upon which revolutionary situations and exceptional transitional phases are based, with its levels varying between public, political, and media affairs. Analysis indicates that distinguishing between these levels requires in-depth studies of vocabulary and contexts to ensure scientific and practical effectiveness in influencing the masses.

The entirety of the discourse of Islamic movements stemmed from perceptions and understandings marred by some imbalances, which made the resulting discourse afflicted with ailments that limited its ability to achieve desired goals. The political arena witnessed adverse outcomes in many scenes due to the inadequacy of this rhetorical performance in addressing complex realities.

It is observed that the Arab revolutions, in their entirety, lacked a clear strategic discourse, which allowed for the emergence of conflicting discourses that created division instead of unity. This absence led to an imbalance in communication tools with the revolutionary situation, causing the paths of change to falter and lose their compass midway.

One of the most prominent observed errors is the lack of attention to the discourse of 'people's livelihoods' and their daily issues, as the forces that participated in power focused on the purely political aspect. This oversight created a loophole through which counter-discourse penetrated to cast doubt on achievements and create a state of hatred and demonization for national projects.

The discourse that touches the aspirations of the people is one that sincerely expresses the values of living, human dignity, and social justice. This discourse must pay special attention to the groups targeted by impoverishment policies and rising prices, to counter attempts at subjugation through intimidation and starvation.

Social and political organizations face a significant challenge in developing a discourse that keeps pace with the current stage and leverages the context to confront fierce media attacks. The ability to influence the masses requires a deep awareness of how to build popular support around a project that expresses the hopes and pains of the street.

Authoritarian regimes entered the conflict over religious discourse, attempting to promote special editions of religion that serve their interests and create a religious backing for their tyranny. This intervention led to the state's nationalization of religion and its political exploitation to strike opponents and justify repressive policies.

The phenomenon of political exploitation of religion emerged through the establishment of official and semi-official institutions that support autocratic regimes, in addition to exploiting certain religious orientations such as the Madkhali and some loyal Salafi currents. These forces used accusatory language and created hatred towards opposing formations to justify arrest and persecution.

Analyzing and self-reviewing discourse is a vital matter for Islamic currents, as it must be based on a conscious critique of past practices. This requires adopting a discourse of transparency with other political forces to determine the minimum consensus to confront counter-revolutions.

The upcoming discourse strategy must be based on the 'two-leg theory,' which is the balance between the political leg and the revolutionary leg without prioritizing one over the other. This balance is capable of preparing the ground for change and restoring the popular base that has lost confidence in traditional discourses.

Renewal in Islamic discourse represents an intrinsic necessity, and it requires recalling solid intellectual contributions such as those presented by Dr. Abdelwahab El-Messiri in 'Milestones of the New Islamic Discourse.' Building a comprehensive strategy requires integrating questions related to revolution, international relations, and societal effectiveness.

Previous discourses suffered from structural ailments and shortcomings in comprehension, as they were affected by a collective psychological state characterized by political one-upmanship and machinations. These complexities led to the failure of elites to build positive relationships based on consensus and trust, which weakened the entire revolutionary situation.

In contrast, the discourse of military coups relied on falsification and distortion to justify control over state institutions and economic arenas. This negative discourse contributed to the militarization of society and institutions, and exerted immense pressure on the Islamic phenomenon through paths of temptation and distortion.

In conclusion, the true renewal of discourse must stem from the principles of civilizational self-renewal, far from being dazzled by or subservient to others. 'Nurseries of change' require formulating a strategy that considers objectives and possesses the effectiveness to engage with people's concerns, and resist all forms of conventionality and intellectual stagnation.

The lack of a discourse strategy led to the process of change moving along paths, some of which went astray, and many of which distorted reality.

The American administration intends to hold the first foundational meeting of the leaders of what is known as the 'Peace Council,' dedicated to the Palestinian issue, specifically the Gaza Strip, on February 19th in Washington D.C. This move comes as a first practical step within a high-level international conference aimed at mobilizing financial and political support for the next phase, with the United States betting on attracting investments and donations worth billions of dollars.

According to informed sources, the American vision seeks to transform this council into a comprehensive international umbrella that will directly oversee the transitional phase in the Gaza Strip after the war ends. The council will be responsible for managing reconstruction funds, and planning and implementing major infrastructure projects, ensuring the flow of aid and directing it towards sustainable development paths that serve regional stability.

The proposed plan indicates that permanent membership in the 'Peace Council' will only be available to countries and entities that provide significant financial contributions, with a minimum contribution ceiling set at one billion US dollars. These funds are intended to finance the 'New Gaza' vision, which aspires to transform the Strip from a devastated area into a regional economic and commercial hub connecting various parties through strategic projects.

In a related context, media reports revealed Israeli tendencies consistent with this proposal, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued directives to change the official seal used at the Rafah land crossing. According to these instructions, the designation 'State of Palestine' will be removed from official seals and replaced with the 'Peace Council' logo, in a clear indication of the beginning of the implementation of new administrative arrangements on the ground.

Obtaining a permanent seat on the Peace Council requires a minimum financial contribution of one billion dollars, allocated to transforming the Strip into a regional economic center.

The Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued an official statement expressing its strong condemnation of the decision by the Israeli occupation authorities' security cabinet to expand administrative and security control over large areas in the occupied West Bank. Copenhagen affirmed in its statement its categorical rejection of these policies, which aim to impose a new demographic and geographical reality, threatening existing balances and undermining legitimate Palestinian rights.

The Danish diplomacy stressed that these Israeli steps represent a blatant violation of international law and UN conventions that define the legal status of the West Bank as occupied territory whose features may not be altered. Sources indicated that continuing these unilateral measures weakens the credibility of adherence to signed international agreements and further complicates the political and field landscape in the region.

The ministry warned in its statement of the serious field consequences of this decision, emphasizing that it causes severe damage to all efforts aimed at promoting stability and security for both Palestinians and Israelis. It clarified that such escalatory decisions contribute to fueling tension and pushing towards further confrontations, moving the region away from the de-escalation path required at this critical time.

In conclusion of its statement, Denmark reiterated its assertion that settlement expansion and control over land effectively eliminate the chances of establishing a genuine political dialogue leading to a two-state solution. It called on the international community to assume its responsibilities to stop these measures that end the possibility of establishing an independent and geographically contiguous Palestinian state, stressing the need to return to the path of negotiations based on international references.

This decision violates international law and constitutes a breach of the conventions that regulate the legal status of the West Bank as occupied territories.

Air traffic tracking data on Tuesday revealed the flight path of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's journey to the United States of America. The data showed that his private plane, known as 'Wing of Zion,' entered the airspace of three European countries that are signatories to the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court.

According to observations by the specialized website 'Flight Radar,' the plane flew over Greece, Italy, and France, all of which are legally bound to implement arrest warrants issued by the international court. However, these capitals took no action to close their airspace or intercept the flight, raising questions about the actual commitment to the court's recent decision.

This trip follows the decision issued by Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court on November 21, 2024, which ordered the issuance of arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former security minister, Yoav Gallant. The Israeli leadership faces accusations of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity during the ongoing aggression on the Gaza Strip.

Observers point out that Netanyahu followed an aerial route similar to the one he took last December during a previous visit to meet Donald Trump. Although he had previously avoided entering the airspace of certain countries for fear of arrest, his recent movements indicate a clear disregard for the international legal restrictions imposed on him.

Netanyahu departed Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv on Tuesday afternoon, heading to Washington D.C. on a diplomatic mission aimed at coordinating with the new American administration. Discussions with US President Donald Trump are expected to focus on the Iranian nuclear file and escalating tensions in the Middle East region.

This visit coincides with intensive diplomatic activity, as the Omani capital, Muscat, hosted indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran last Friday. These movements come amidst statements from the American side about the possibility of a new round of negotiations early next week to de-escalate military tensions.

Netanyahu's visit to Washington is expected to conclude by next Friday morning, after which he will return to Israel upon completing his consultations. Attention remains focused on international reactions to European countries allowing a plane with an internationally wanted individual to pass through their sovereign airspace without legal impediments.

The three countries are parties to the Rome Statute and members of the International Criminal Court, and are bound by its decisions, yet their airspace was not closed to the plane.

A report published by the American website 'Mondoweiss' asserted that international liberal institutions are designed in a way that allows them to acknowledge the oppression faced by the Palestinian people, but they lack the necessary tools or will to end it. The writer, Abd al-Qayyum Ahmed, explained that these organizations operate within frameworks aimed at regulating and managing violence rather than dismantling the colonial systems that continuously produce it.

The analysis reviewed two prominent incidents that revealed the nature of these institutions' work, where the recent stances of both 'Doctors Without Borders' and 'Human Rights Watch' demonstrated the limits of the liberal ceiling in dealing with existential Palestinian rights. The writer considered these institutions to represent a model of the international system that documents genocide but is unable to comprehend the demands for liberation and the dismantling of colonialism.

In the details of the first incident, the report indicated that 'Doctors Without Borders' agreed last January to hand over lists of its Palestinian staff to the Israeli occupation authorities as a condition for continuing its operations in the Gaza Strip. This approach sparked widespread anger in Palestinian circles, which view these lists as a security tool for surveillance and arrest, and the organization only retracted under the weight of popular pressure.

The second incident involved the resignation of researchers from 'Human Rights Watch' after senior leadership intervened to obstruct the publication of a specialized report on the Palestinian right of return. The objection was not to the accuracy of the scientific research, but to the political ramifications imposed by the right of return as a tool to end historical injustice, rather than merely a legal description.

The report quoted researcher 'Omar Shakir' following his resignation from the international human rights organization, stating that the leadership explicitly expressed concerns that the report would lead to the organization being accused of challenging 'the Jewishness of the state.' This position reflects the unwritten boundaries that liberal institutions adhere to in order to maintain their standing within the existing global order.

The writer believes that these institutions face structural limitations stemming from the foundations of legal liberalism that emerged after World War II. While 'Human Rights Watch' relies on international human rights law, 'Doctors Without Borders' relies on international humanitarian law, both of which are frameworks aimed at regulating wars and atrocities without affecting the essence of hegemony.

The analysis added that international law has never failed to monitor colonial violence; rather, it has developed mechanisms to accommodate racial hierarchies and land appropriation under the guise of 'universal application.' Palestine is considered the fault line that exposes the falsity of this claim, as humanitarian interventions remain confined to the internationally permissible scope.

The policy of 'neutrality' adopted by these organizations imposes conditions that make the provision of medical care contingent on not disturbing the existing political conditions. This approach leads to the transformation of the catastrophe in the Gaza Strip into a mere isolated 'humanitarian emergency,' instead of dealing with it as a natural and inevitable outcome of the ongoing siege and settler rule.

In a related context, the report indicated that human rights organizations might go far in labeling 'apartheid' or 'collective punishment,' but they immediately retract when the analysis moves towards prospects of liberation and the future. These expressive boundaries narrow whenever the argument approaches challenging the international system that provides these organizations with their legitimacy and funding.

Wealthy donors from the 'Global North' play a pivotal role in drawing these red lines, as they have significant influence within the boards of major liberal institutions. The report revealed internal practices including the exclusion of employees known for their strong pro-Palestinian stances from sensitive meetings to avoid what are called 'reputational risks.'

Abd al-Qayyum Ahmed affirmed that terms such as 'settler colonialism' and 'decolonization' raise complex calculations within these corridors, where the standards of what is acceptable and unacceptable change based on the political moment. He stressed that these institutions are not necessarily 'malicious,' but they are ultimately tools for measuring injustice, not engines for actual liberation.

The article concluded that liberal boundaries always move in direct relation to power; they close completely when the global system or 'empire' feels a real threat to its interests. Therefore, betting on the expansion of these boundaries from within is a losing bet in the Palestinian liberation struggle, which requires external impetus.

In conclusion, the writer emphasized that liberation will not come from waiting for international organizations, but from resistance movements that render these liberal boundaries irrelevant to reality. Although these institutions may follow liberation movements in later stages, they will always remain constrained by the liberal system that grants them existence and funding.

International law has not failed to see colonial violence; rather, it has learned how to manage it and regulate atrocities without retreating from conquest.

Informed media sources revealed decisive trends within the Israeli occupation government to inform the American administration of the failure of the current negotiation path related to the Gaza Strip. The sources clarified that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intends to brief US President Donald Trump on the field developments, indicating that the 'second phase' of the de-escalation proposal has not achieved any tangible progress on the ground so far.

In the context of this dramatic shift, reports quoted responsible sources as saying that Tel Aviv officially notified Washington that a return to a wide-scale military option in the Strip has become an unavoidable necessity. These messages come at a time when the region is witnessing great anticipation for the outcome of high-level diplomatic meetings, as Israel seeks to obtain political cover for its upcoming operations, which it describes as necessary to confront current challenges.

Leaked data indicates that the occupation is effectively paving the way for announcing the collapse of ongoing negotiations and the start of a new round of intense fighting in various areas of the Strip. Observers believe that these moves aim to preempt any international pressure that might be exerted to impose an agreement that does not meet Israeli conditions, especially with sources acknowledging that the diplomatic path has reached a dead end requiring alternative military interventions.

The anticipated meeting between Netanyahu and Trump is expected to constitute a turning point in the strategy adopted towards Gaza, where alternative military options to the faltering agreement will be presented. These developments confirm that the region is heading towards a new escalation that may change the features of the next phase, amid the Israeli side's insistence that political solutions are no longer sufficient to achieve the declared goals of the war.

Launching another wide-scale military operation in Gaza has become necessary given the current data.

The Rafah land crossing is no longer just a border point connecting the Gaza Strip to the outside world; it has transformed into an intense symbol of the political and security restrictions imposed by the occupation authorities. Despite the announcement of its partial reopening, field realities indicate that the crossing operates within a very narrow margin, making it a tool for reorganizing the siege rather than breaking its imposed restrictions on Palestinians.

Official sources in the Government Media Office reported that the first week of the crossing's operation saw only 397 travelers cross out of 1,600 who were supposed to travel. The sources clarified that these numbers reflect an Israeli compliance rate not exceeding 25%, confirming that the occupation still fully controls the pace of movement and humanitarian supply chains.

Movement through the crossing is currently limited to very specific categories, primarily critical medical cases requiring surgical intervention unavailable within the Strip. However, these categories face complex security procedures, including the requirement for prior approvals and thorough inspections, turning the treatment journey into an arduous path fraught with psychological and physical risks.

Data from the World Health Organization indicates that over 18,500 patients in Gaza are in urgent need of travel to save their lives. Amidst the extremely slow coordination procedures, health authorities have recorded the deaths of over 1,600 Palestinians while on waiting lists, highlighting the exorbitant human cost of restrictions on freedom of movement.

Palestinian sources confirmed that the local role in managing the crossing is limited to technical and organizational aspects and preparing lists, while sovereign and security decisions remain in the hands of other parties. This reality places the Palestinian administration in the position of a 'crisis manager' who lacks real tools to expand the crossing's capacity or ensure the travel of thousands of stranded individuals.

The restrictions imposed by the occupation are numerous, including setting a very low daily ceiling for the number of crossers and subjecting travelers to lengthy interrogations before allowing them to reach the Egyptian side. These measures, according to observers, aim to maintain the state of humanitarian pressure and prevent the full return to normal life in the Gaza Strip.

Local residents and crossers described the new crossing as a 'prison gate,' due to its architectural design dominated by purely security features such as barbed wire and surveillance cameras. These images reflect the prevailing impression among Gazans that the crossing was designed to be a security control point that increases the burden of isolation rather than a window to freedom.

Travel lists still include tens of thousands of names, including university students who have lost their academic places and residents abroad whose residency permits are threatened with cancellation. Ismail Al-Thawabta, head of the Government Media Office, confirms that the absence of a clear timeline for addressing these cases exacerbates the state of anxiety and popular tension in the Strip.

Human rights organizations consider what is happening at the Rafah crossing to be 'forced selection' of humanitarian needs, where officials are forced to choose a very limited number from among thousands of emergency cases. This situation creates daily ethical and humanitarian dilemmas, amidst the continued intransigence of the occupation in increasing the number of security approvals granted to travelers.

Testimonies from crossers reported that some of them were subjected to pressure and blackmail by the occupation's security apparatus during the coordination or crossing process, adding a dangerous security dimension to the travel process. These pressures increase the suffering of patients and their companions, and make obtaining the right to treatment a means of political and security extortion.

On the political front, analysts believe that the opening of the crossing in this limited manner comes within regional understandings aimed at preventing the explosion of humanitarian conditions without offering radical solutions. These arrangements remain 'temporary and subject to cancellation' at any moment, making the stability of crossing movement hostage to fluctuating field and political developments.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health clarified that the limited number of daily travelers makes the travel process a race against time, especially for cancer patients and children with chronic diseases. The ministry affirms that the only solution to end this tragedy lies in opening the crossing permanently and fully, away from Israeli security interventions and restrictions.

Despite limited international welcome for steps to ease the siege, UN organizations emphasize that the crossing is still far from being a natural gateway for individuals and goods. The siege remains in essence, and what has changed are only the management mechanisms that ensure Gaza remains under close control and supervision.

Rafah crossing, under current data, remains a testament to the ongoing suffering of two million Palestinians living in a large prison. With each passing day without a full opening, the list of victims among patients and stranded individuals increases, placing the international community before its legal and moral responsibilities to end this ongoing crime.

The crossing does not operate at its actual capacity, but according to predetermined numbers, often less than the announced ceiling, making the impact of the opening limited on the humanitarian reality.

Diplomatic circles in Tel Aviv are observing with increasing interest the growing strategic relations between the United Arab Emirates and the Republic of India, seeing in them the formation of a new economic corridor that redraws the balance of power in the region. Observers point out that this alliance goes beyond traditional commercial dimensions to solidify Abu Dhabi's position as a strategic partner for a rising superpower, providing the Israeli occupation with a foothold within a stable regional system, away from escalating tensions in other issues.

In an interpretation of the Gulf scene, a former advisor to the presidency of the occupying state considered that recent Emirati moves reflect political maturity in dealing with regional pressures, especially in light of the fierce competition with Saudi Arabia. He explained that Mohammed bin Zayed's visits to New Delhi and Moscow aim to secure wide margins for maneuver in Central Asia, and ensure energy flows away from traditional dominance, which gives Abu Dhabi a high capacity to influence the global energy map.

On the other hand, analysts believe that recent Saudi behavior expresses a strategic predicament resulting from complex economic challenges, as Riyadh tries to assert its dominance by pressuring international companies to relocate their headquarters. Reports reveal that these pressures, which have reached the point of indirect confrontations in regional issues such as Yemen, reflect concern about the widening financial deficit and the difficulty of fulfilling the huge promises associated with Vision 2030 in light of current changes.

Economic data based on international reports issued in December 2025 indicate a structural gap between the two neighboring economies, as the public debt ratio in Saudi Arabia jumped 16-fold within one decade to reach 32% of GDP. This acceleration in borrowing raises questions about the sustainability of major projects, especially with the 25% decline in Aramco's profits, which caused a shake in the Kingdom's financial confidence in recent months.

In contrast, the UAE maintains remarkable financial stability, relying 78% on real productive sectors including tourism, logistics, and finance, away from artificial government spending. Economic sources confirm that Abu Dhabi has succeeded in achieving balanced growth of 4.8%, utilizing its huge reserves to purchase global strategic assets instead of depleting them to cover the financial deficit, which enhances its attractiveness as a stable financial center.

Regarding attracting investments, the disparity in figures is clear; while Riyadh aimed to attract $100 billion in foreign direct investment, it only succeeded in actually collecting between $12 and $20 billion. This failure to achieve investment targets places additional pressure on the Saudi decision-maker, who finds himself compelled to fulfill huge external investment commitments in the United States and other countries at a time when liquidity is urgently needed domestically.

Emirati leadership understands that 21st-century conflicts are not decided by traditional military confrontations or media campaigns, but by controlling logistical corridors, ports, and pipelines. From this perspective, Abu Dhabi has worked to solidify its position as the owner of the alternative energy artery heading towards Europe, thereby overcoming geopolitical complexities associated with Russia and Iran, and directly linking major gas reserves to Western markets.

Israel's reading of the scene concluded that the 'Emirati pillar,' along with India, represents the solid foundation for what is called the 'Indo-Abrahamic Alliance,' a project that Tel Aviv sees as a guarantee for its national security and economic expansion. It appears that the occupation has made its choice to align with this axis, which demonstrates strategic patience and the ability to maneuver among major powers, considering that the stability of this alliance is the real guarantee for survival in a changing regional environment.

The Emirati pillar, alongside the Indian pillar, is the true basis for the Israeli structure in the region within what is known as the Indo-Abrahamic Alliance.

Large forces of the Israeli occupation army, supported by heavy machinery and bulldozers, stormed the Al-Bustan neighborhood in Silwan, south of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, where they began implementing a wide-ranging demolition campaign targeting citizens' facilities and properties. The forces imposed a strict security cordon on the area, preventing entry or exit, while soldiers climbed the roofs of neighboring houses to secure the demolition operations that affected commercial warehouses and agricultural sheds.

The destruction operations included warehouses belonging to citizen Muhammad Abd Odeh, designated for selling building materials, in addition to facilities designated for vehicles in the courtyards of homes belonging to the Odeh family. The demolition also affected warehouses of the Abu Diab family, which contained belongings and furniture from homes previously demolished by the occupation in the neighborhood, reflecting a systematic policy of pursuing residents in their remaining properties and tightening the noose on them to push them towards forced displacement.

Field sources reported that the demolition work was accompanied by brutal and direct assaults on residents who tried to confront the bulldozers, resulting in the injury of four citizens with wounds and bruises due to beating and abuse. Occupation forces obstructed the access of ambulance vehicles to the neighborhood for long hours, forcing medical teams to provide field treatment to the injured in difficult conditions before they were later able to transfer them to health centers.

In the context of the field escalation, occupation forces arrested two young men, Yazan Odeh and Yasser Dweik, after severely beating them during the raid, and took them to an unknown destination. These repressive measures come within the framework of the occupation's attempts to impose a new reality in the neighborhood, whose residents face the risk of mass displacement in favor of settlement projects and biblical gardens that seek to change the identity of occupied Jerusalem.

For its part, local sources in Jerusalem confirmed that the occupation authorities disregarded a judicial decision issued by the Central Court to stop demolition operations in the neighborhood, as they gave residents a formal deadline that did not exceed 20 minutes before starting the destruction. Concern prevails among the residents of Al-Bustan neighborhood about the expansion of the demolition area to include dozens of threatened homes, amid the occupation's insistence on implementing its settlement plans despite international and local warnings of the repercussions of these crimes.

The occupation authorities gave citizens only 20 minutes to object as a formal procedure, despite a judicial decision from the Central Court to stop the demolition.

Iranian-American relations are going through one of their most critical periods, with military escalation on the ground intertwined with political and economic pressures that have reached their peak. This complex scene has pushed the region to the brink of an explosion that could reshape the balance of power in the Middle East, making diplomacy an inevitable necessity once again.

The language of dialogue has returned to the forefront through active Omani mediation in Muscat, primarily aimed at preventing the situation from sliding into an uncalculated, comprehensive confrontation. These moves reflect both parties' desire to explore alternative paths to the language of threats that prevailed in recent months, despite continued mutual apprehension.

The recent period witnessed a series of reciprocal military strikes targeting sensitive sites, revealing the limits of each party's military power. Washington realized that any widespread attack could ignite multiple fronts in the region, leading to catastrophic disruptions in global energy markets and oil prices.

In contrast, Tehran finds itself facing an internal economic predicament due to ongoing sanctions and the deteriorating value of the local currency, increasing social pressures. Despite possessing regional deterrence tools, entering a direct war with the United States could seriously threaten the stability of the political system.

Through the negotiation table, the United States seeks to achieve high demands that go beyond the nuclear file to include ballistic missiles. The American administration believes that any sustainable agreement must ensure the containment of Iran's regional influence and redraw the map of powers to serve the interests of its allies in the region.

For its part, Iran treats these negotiations as a tool to defend its supreme strategic interests, declaring its categorical rejection of expanding the scope of discussion to include its defensive capabilities. Iran's primary focus is on the necessity of lifting economic sanctions and ensuring the unimpeded flow of oil exports without international obstacles.

Tehran also insists on obtaining legal guarantees that prevent any future US administration from unilaterally withdrawing from the agreement, as happened in 2018. This demand represents a stumbling block in the negotiations, given the nature of the American political system and the difficulty of providing commitments that transcend administrations.

Observers believe that political realism may compel both parties to accept a 'temporary agreement' or what is known as a minimum deal for now. This formula is based on Iran freezing high uranium enrichment levels in exchange for a gradual and programmed easing of some economic sanctions.

Any potential breakthrough in the Muscat track will immediately cast its shadow on hot files in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Major understandings between Washington and Tehran often translate into de-escalation on the ground in arenas witnessing Iranian influence, which could open the door for local political settlements.

On the other hand, analysts warn that the failure of this round of negotiations could open the door to an unprecedented phase of escalation. In the absence of a diplomatic solution, parties may resort to harsh options, including broader military strikes and an increase in sectarian and political tension.

Washington realizes that the 'maximum pressure' policy has not fully succeeded in changing Iranian behavior but has pushed Tehran towards more nuclear intransigence. This realization prompts some wings in the American administration to prefer the diplomatic path as the least bad and costly option at present.

For Iran, the nuclear program represents a powerful bargaining chip that cannot be relinquished without a rewarding economic and political return. Tehran uses the pace of enrichment as a tool to improve its negotiating terms, constantly emphasizing that its program has peaceful objectives despite widespread international skepticism.

The current conflict represents a battle over the shape of the upcoming regional order in the Middle East, not just a technical dispute over centrifuges. The negotiations are a real test of both parties' ability to make painful concessions in exchange for achieving relative stability that serves their internal and external interests.

In conclusion, the region remains suspended between hopes of diplomatic success and fears of military failure, as regional capitals await the outcomes of the Muscat meetings. Either political pragmatism will prevail and lead to long-term de-escalation, or everyone will slide into a confrontation that could set the region back years.

Direct confrontation has become more costly than sitting at the negotiating table for both parties in light of current economic and geopolitical crises.

The presidential decree issued by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas regarding holding general elections has sparked a wave of Israeli analyses questioning the feasibility of this step and its repercussions on regional stability. The decree called for elections for the Palestinian National Council on November 1, 2026, to include Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the diaspora, according to a full proportional representation system.

In this context, Israeli writer Segev Steinberg, communications director at the 'Jerusalem Center for Foreign Affairs and Security,' published an article in 'Maariv' newspaper in which he considered these steps to outwardly appear as a response to international demands for PA reform. However, Steinberg believes that the initiative is doomed to fail, describing it as a 'survival mechanism' for an authority suffering from a severe erosion of its popular legitimacy.

These moves coincide with May 14, 2026, being set as the date for the eighth General Conference of the Fatah movement in Ramallah, while the Palestinian government had previously announced local elections in April of the same year. Observers believe that including the Gaza Strip in these election dates represents a significant logistical and political challenge given the absence of effective PA control over the Strip since 2006.

The Israeli analysis was based on shocking digital data from opinion polls conducted by the 'PSR' institute, headed by Khalil Shikaki, which revealed that between 80 and 88 percent of Palestinians are demanding President Abbas's departure. The results show that the Palestinian street views the current PA institutions as entities lacking true representation and suffering from structural crises and administrative corruption.

Regarding party balances, hypothetical parliamentary election polls indicated an overwhelming lead for the Hamas movement, which could garner about 60 percent of the votes. In contrast, Fatah's support does not exceed 30 percent, threatening a repeat of the 2006 election scenario that overturned Palestinian political balances.

Despite the widespread destruction witnessed in the Gaza Strip in recent months, the writer believes that the Hamas movement has not lost its popular momentum; rather, it has managed to strengthen it in some circles. About 53 percent of Palestinians still support the movement's strategic decisions, considering that it has achieved tangible successes in prisoner issues and confronting Israeli military pressures.

In the West Bank, data indicates that 87 percent of the population opposes the idea of disarming factions, with a clear tendency to support the continued presence of armed forces as a guarantee for achieving political gains. These figures reflect a deep gap between the international vision of a 'renewed authority' and the aspirations of the street, which sees armed resistance as a more effective path than the faltering diplomatic one.

Steinberg recalled the 2021 experience, when Abbas announced legislative elections and then backed down, citing the issue of Jerusalem, which Hamas exploited to present itself as the leader of the national project. The writer believes that the current announcement of polling stations in devastated Gaza may be merely a 'propaganda maneuver' aimed at creating future justifications for postponing the electoral process again.

The article touched upon the state of exhaustion in the Gaza Strip and the desire for reconstruction, noting that the rise in support for the two-state solution to 61 percent does not necessarily mean acceptance of the PA's conditions. Rather, this support is conditional on the continued effectiveness of armed forces, which makes any political horizon proposed by Ramallah lack the credibility and legitimacy necessary for implementation on the ground.

The analysis concluded with a warning to the political level in Israel and the West against betting that the democratic process will automatically lead to strengthening the 'moderate camp.' Steinberg considered that the existing reality indicates that elections, if held, could become the bridge through which Hamas crosses to consolidate its political and legal influence over the ruins of the current Palestinian Authority.

Elections may turn into an additional tool to consolidate Hamas's influence instead of a genuine renewal of Palestinian governance.

Cities in the West Bank are witnessing a widespread popular and institutional movement, led by national and Islamic forces and institutions concerned with prisoner affairs, with the aim of pressuring the International Committee of the Red Cross. These movements come amid increasing warnings that detainees are being subjected to what is described as 'silent execution' inside occupation cells, where the pace of violations is escalating unprecedentedly.

Popular events organized simultaneous protest vigils in front of Red Cross headquarters in several governorates, holding the international organization responsible for its legal and humanitarian duties. Participants raised slogans condemning the policy of enforced disappearance and systematic starvation, emphasizing that international silence gives the occupation a green light to continue its crimes against the prisoner movement.

In Tulkarm city, sources reported that a massive march set off with the participation of prisoners' families and representatives of factions, expressing anger at the escalation of assaults inside prisons. Participants pointed out that the pace of repression reached its peak since October 7, 2023, amid serious fears of the enactment of Israeli laws that officially permit the execution of prisoners.

Speakers in Tulkarm warned that passing a law to execute prisoners constitutes a blatant violation of international humanitarian law and portends an explosion of the situation on the ground inside and outside prisons. National forces considered this step a dangerous escalation that requires urgent international intervention to protect thousands of detainees from the imminent danger of death.

In Hebron governorate, protest vigils focused on the suffering of female prisoners, with statistics indicating that 16 female prisoners from the governorate are among 56 female prisoners held in occupation prisons. Sources explained that prisoners' families live in a state of constant anxiety due to the lack of information about their children for more than two years as a result of strict Israeli restrictions.

Detainees' families spoke about catastrophic health conditions observed in those released, including severe emaciation, infectious skin diseases, and clear signs of physical torture. Testimonies from released prisoners confirmed that prison administrations prevent prisoners from meeting lawyers and assault them severely during transfers, exacerbating their isolation and suffering.

In Ramallah city, dozens participated in a vigil described as a cry against the 'forgotten issue,' demanding an end to the stagnation surrounding the prisoners' file since the Red Cross visits stopped. Protesters called for an emergency meeting of the states party to the Geneva Conventions to take decisive measures to stop policies of deliberate medical neglect and starvation.

For his part, the head of the Palestinian Prisoners' Club, Abdullah Zghari, described Israeli prisons as having turned into 'disaster-stricken places' lacking the most basic human necessities. Zghari affirmed that prisoners are subjected to full-fledged crimes including sexual violence and prolonged solitary confinement, holding the international community responsible for its failure to perform its oversight role.

Zghari criticized the double standards in the Red Cross's dealings, noting that the organization was used in exchange operations and the retrieval of Israeli bodies while being prevented from visiting Palestinians. He demanded the immediate resumption of family visits and the opening of prison doors to independent human rights committees to ascertain the extent of violations committed behind bars.

In a related context, the global campaign 'We are all Gaza... We are all Palestine' launched the 'Million Signatures' initiative with the aim of internationalizing the prisoners' issue and mobilizing global public opinion. This campaign coincides with protest events in several Arab and European capitals, seeking to demand that the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions compel Israel to respect its obligations.

The organizers of the popular movement stressed that the battle of the prisoners is an integral part of the war of extermination to which the Palestinian people are subjected in all their places of presence. They affirmed that continued disregard for the suffering of thousands of detainees threatens the collapse of the entire international legal system, calling for the continuation of field activities until prisoners achieve their freedom and basic rights.

Prisons have turned into disaster-stricken places witnessing escalating crimes including torture, sexual violence, and starvation, and the international community bears responsibility for this silence.

Over the past two years of the genocidal war on the Gaza Strip, Arab and Palestinian strategy has witnessed a state of political realism that has yielded entirely counterproductive results for the interests of the Palestinian people. At a time when the occupation seeks to crush Palestinian existence, official parties have continued to pursue paths that have proven to be failures in curbing aggression or protecting legitimate national rights.

A close examination of the statements of Netanyahu's government ministers and the policies implemented on the ground in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem clearly reveals the fallacy of relying on the 'realism' that has been promoted for three decades. This approach ultimately led to the abandonment of struggle alternatives and subservience to a reality imposed by the occupation through force of arms and unlimited Western support.

Today, there is an urgent need to restore an effective and influential Arab strategy, capable of absorbing the radical changes that have swept the region since the start of the genocidal war. The Zionist project is no longer content with occupying land; it is expanding to impose its complete control through Judaization and the final fragmentation of Palestinian geography.

These transformations coincide with escalating American-Israeli mobilization targeting regional powers such as Iran, with continued direct threats to Lebanon and Syria. This geopolitical climate aims to create international conditions that impose absolute submission to the Israeli fait accompli as the sole dominant power in the Middle East.

Recent events have revealed the depth of American adherence to Israeli policy, a connection that extends beyond political interests to deep ideological and colonial considerations. Despite this clarity, official Arab and Palestinian policy has remained in retreat, unable even to adhere to the minimum of the Arab Peace Initiative.

The state of political crushing experienced by some Arab capitals has led to the dwarfing of roles supposed to defend an existential cause. The direct result of this weakness has been the expansion of the Israeli threat to include Arab national security in its comprehensive sense, from the front-line states to the depths of the Gulf and the African continent.

Successive American administrations, especially during the Trump era, used a purely Zionist lexicon in addressing the world, which led some Arab politicians to despair of the justice of the cause. This despair led some towards security alliances with the occupation, bypassing the rights of the victims and holding them responsible for resisting Zionist criminality.

Today, the Palestinian and Arab sides lack the 'element of power' that intellectual and political elites have called for over decades. Adhering to the minimum of a national strategy requires activating diplomatic and legal struggle tools in a real way, not just slogans consumed in international forums without tangible effect.

The current approach to dealing with Israeli expansion needs a comprehensive revolution in tools, starting with activating a comprehensive boycott and holding occupation leaders accountable for war crimes. Without a real deterrent, political slogans will remain mere ink on paper, blown away by the wind with every bomb that falls on the heads of civilians in Gaza.

The seriousness of the stage is evident in the dwindling influence of pro-Palestinian Arab policy, which deepens the victims' feeling of betrayal by their strategic depth. This fragmentation of positions and goals gives the occupation a golden opportunity to entrench the apartheid system and prevent the establishment of any geographically contiguous Palestinian entity.

In the face of these existential challenges, Palestinian responsibility emerges as a cornerstone for rekindling hope in the Arab street. Unifying efforts to dismantle the colonial structure of the Zionist regime is the first and essential step towards defeating the occupation, a task that requires a high appreciation of the self-power of the masses.

The moral and political collapse of the Israeli narrative in international forums must be leveraged, an achievement made possible by the steadfastness and sacrifices of the Palestinian people. This global shift provides a historic opportunity to present a new model of struggle and politics based on historical rights, not on gratuitous concessions.

An influential Arab political structure cannot be achieved without a real evaluation of the internal Palestinian path and an end to the state of fragmentation and subservience to external dictates. Palestinian responsibility, first and foremost, is the driving force that can stop the successive collapses in the Arab political system regarding the issue.

In conclusion, the reliance remains on the awareness of the Palestinian street and its ability to impose a national agenda that transcends the stumbling blocks of the past. Confronting the fascist Zionist mind requires a firm will that believes that rights are not begged for at absurd negotiation tables, but are seized by the steadfastness and unity of the people in the field of comprehensive confrontation.

Mobilizing and unifying efforts to dismantle the colonial structure of the Zionist apartheid system is the first step to defeating the occupation, and it is a Palestinian responsibility first and foremost.

Eight Arab and Islamic countries expressed their categorical rejection of the new Israeli measures aimed at imposing illegitimate sovereignty and entrenching settlements in the occupied West Bank. This stance came in a joint statement by the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, the UAE, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan, in response to the recent occupation decisions.

The ministers warned in their statement that these steps accelerate attempts at illegal annexation of the West Bank and the displacement of the Palestinian people from their land. The signatory countries affirmed that the occupation has no sovereignty over Palestinian territories, emphasizing that all measures taken are null and void and lack any international legal basis.

The joint statement indicated that the continuation of Israeli expansionist policies directly leads to the escalation of violence and conflict throughout the region. The ministers considered these decisions a blatant violation of international law, undermining the two-state solution and international efforts aimed at achieving peace and stability.

The Israeli Ministerial Committee for Political and Security Affairs (the Cabinet) had approved a package of decisions aimed at making radical changes in the legal and civil reality in the West Bank. These moves aim to strengthen direct Israeli control and bypass the powers granted to the Palestinian Authority under previously signed international agreements.

For his part, Palestinian Vice President Hussein al-Sheikh called on the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the UN Security Council to hold urgent sessions to discuss these developments. Al-Sheikh described the Israeli decisions as undermining all binding agreements and constituting a dangerous escalation aimed at dragging the region towards further tension.

In a related context, the State of Kuwait, in a statement from its foreign ministry, condemned the measures that impose an illegitimate reality aimed at changing the demographic and historical reality in the occupied territories. Kuwait stressed the necessity for the international community and the Security Council to act to stop these violations that undermine the chances of a just and comprehensive peace.

Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Jasem Al-Budaiwi, also expressed his strong condemnation of these unilateral attempts that contradict the principles of international legitimacy. Al-Budaiwi affirmed the steadfast Gulf position regarding the right of the Palestinian people to establish their independent state on the borders of June 4, 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

The new Israeli measures include the annulment of the Jordanian law that prevented the sale of land to Palestinians in the West Bank in favor of settlers. The decisions also included declassifying land records, facilitating illegal seizure and sale operations in favor of extremist settlement associations.

In another escalatory step, the occupation decided to transfer building permit powers in the settlement bloc in Hebron from the Palestinian municipality to the Israeli Civil Administration. This decision represents a dangerous precedent in withdrawing civil powers from elected Palestinian institutions in favor of the military occupation apparatuses.

The new Israeli powers extended to include supervision and enforcement in areas classified (A) and (B), which are administratively and security-wise under the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority. The occupation authorities justify their intrusion into these areas by citing violations related to unlicensed construction, water issues, and the protection of archaeological sites.

Observers believe that these moves effectively end the divisions of the 'Oslo II' agreement of 1995, which granted Palestinians full control over Area (A). The new measures allow the occupation army to carry out widespread demolition and confiscation operations against Palestinian properties in the heart of cities and villages.

These developments come at a time when Israel has intensified its attacks in the West Bank and Jerusalem since the start of the war on the Gaza Strip in October 2023. These attacks include systematic killings, demolition of facilities, and expansion of settlement outposts, paving the way for the official annexation of the West Bank.

The eight countries reiterated their call for the international community to assume its legal and moral responsibilities and compel Israel to stop its dangerous escalation and the inflammatory statements of its officials. They affirmed that fulfilling the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination is the only way to ensure regional security and stability.

Diplomatic sources concluded by emphasizing that Arab and Islamic action will continue in international forums to confront these policies. They stressed that any attempt to change the status quo in the West Bank will not gain any legitimacy, no matter how long the occupation lasts or how laws imposed by force of arms change.

Israel has no sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian land, and all these measures are null and void and lack any legal effect.

Hebrew press sources reported deep gaps and stark contradictions in the narrative presented by the Prime Minister of the occupation, Benjamin Netanyahu, regarding the timing of his knowledge of Hamas's plans to carry out a large-scale attack. Reports indicated that leaked documents prove he received detailed strategic warnings years before the events of October 7, 2023.

Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper revealed that Netanyahu was fully aware of an intelligence file named 'Jericho Wall,' which contained precise details about the Palestinian movement's intention to launch a multi-front attack. This plan, developed between 2018 and 2022, focused on targeting military bases and settlement communities in the Gaza envelope area in a coordinated manner.

The warnings date back to mid-April 2018, when experts in the Military Intelligence Directorate (AMAN) prepared a special document that was distributed to the narrow circle of decision-makers. The list of recipients included Netanyahu's military aides, the then-Minister of Defense, as well as the heads of the Shin Bet and Mossad agencies and the National Security Council.

That document included fundamental questions about the nature of the military buildup of Hamas's military wing in the Gaza Strip, warning of the movement's intentions to seize strategic locations deep inside. Intelligence reports at the time confirmed that the exercises conducted by the movement were not merely a show of force, but a prelude to a large-scale invasion operation.

Despite this information, Netanyahu continued to deny prior knowledge of these documents to State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman, claiming that his office did not receive these reports until after the current confrontation erupted. This repeated denial put the political leadership in direct confrontation with the security agencies, which confirm the documented delivery of these reports on time.

Recent days witnessed a surprising turn, as Netanyahu submitted a lengthy 55-page response to the State Comptroller, implicitly acknowledging receipt of the 2018 report. However, media circles accused the Prime Minister of resorting to 'selective quoting' to mislead ongoing investigations into the major security failure.

According to journalistic investigations, Netanyahu deliberately quoted parts of the report that described the attack scenario as 'unlikely in the near term.' In contrast, he omitted essential paragraphs that explicitly stated that the plan reflected serious future ambitions of the movement, and that it was working hard to enhance its capabilities to achieve this goal.

This manipulation in presenting the facts sparked a wave of criticism within political and security circles in Tel Aviv, where observers considered it an attempt to evade historical responsibility for the failure to prevent the attack. These revelations put Netanyahu's credibility on the line, especially with increasing public pressure to hold those responsible for the negligence accountable.

The documents indicate that the political level ignored for years warnings that pointed to a radical shift in Hamas's military strategy from defense to offense. The question remains in the Israeli street about the reasons that led Netanyahu to ignore this sensitive intelligence information despite its accuracy and seriousness.

Is Hamas's military wing building up its forces for a large-scale attack on our territories?

Official documents released by the US Department of Justice have reopened the file on the mysterious relationship between convicted businessman Jeffrey Epstein and the Israeli occupation. These correspondences raise deep questions about whether Epstein's role extended beyond financial activity and sexual crimes to systematic intelligence work for foreign security agencies.

According to press reports based on millions of files related to the case, there is a stark contradiction in Epstein's attitudes towards Israel. While private messages showed his categorical refusal to visit Tel Aviv in 2017, other documents revealed extensive financial and investment involvement in the security technology sector within the occupying state.

One correspondence indicates an invitation extended by spiritual expert Deepak Chopra to Epstein to visit Israel under pseudonyms, but Epstein's response was decisive in completely rejecting the idea. This public rejection in private messages is seen by analysts as a mystery, especially when compared to the extent of his relations with the Israeli political elite, led by Ehud Barak.

In a related context, a report issued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in Los Angeles in 2020 revealed serious doubts about Epstein's security identity. The report quoted a confidential source's conviction that Epstein was a recruited agent for the Israeli Mossad and that he received advanced intelligence training to serve specific objectives.

Epstein's name was linked to the famous lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who was a link to wealthy and influential families in the United States, including the Kushner family. Despite Dershowitz's denial of these allegations and his description of them as absurd, intelligence reports continue to link Epstein's network of relationships with allied security operations.

On the Israeli domestic front, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu entered the fray, attempting to exploit the issue to settle political scores with his rival Ehud Barak. Netanyahu considered that the close friendship between Barak and Epstein did not necessarily mean working for the state, but could indicate involvement in suspicious personal paths.

Published files showed that Ehud Barak and his wife were regular guests at Epstein's luxurious apartment in New York, and this relationship continued even after Epstein's first conviction in 2006. Although Barak later expressed regret, the documents prove his planning for additional visits prior to Epstein's final arrest and mysterious death.

The relationship was not limited to social aspects, but extended to direct funding for Israeli startups specializing in cybersecurity. Epstein participated in arranging a $1.5 million investment in 'Carbyne', which operated under the name 'Reporty Homeland Security' associated with Barak.

Correspondence also reveals Epstein's meticulous interest in Israeli inventions, as he would send himself details about patents for emerging technology companies. Security experts view this technical passion as part of an information gathering operation or building a cover for intertwined commercial and intelligence activities.

For her part, former British intelligence officer Lynette Nusbacher raised questions about the source of Epstein's enormous wealth, pointing to the possibility of secret government funding. Nusbacher considered that Epstein might have been a useful intelligence 'asset' for the Mossad, even if he was not an official officer in the agency.

The documents touched upon Epstein's request for a second passport for his partner Ghislaine Maxwell in 2003 to facilitate her travel between Israel and Arab countries. This request reinforces the hypothesis of free movement in conflict and tension areas for undeclared agendas, away from traditional visa control.

Returning to his personal history, Epstein visited Israel with his parents in the mid-1980s and stayed in the most luxurious hotels in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Despite the scarcity of officially documented visits later, his interest in luxury real estate in Israel remained through his subscription to specialized real estate auction sites.

Conspiracy theories surrounding the death of Robert Maxwell, Ghislaine's father, who was also suspected of having ties to the Mossad, also emerge in the files. Epstein hinted in emails at his belief that the Mossad might have been involved in Maxwell's assassination, reflecting the depth of his penetration into the inner workings of security agencies.

In conclusion, Epstein's relationship with the Israeli occupation remains a mixture of mysterious financial investments, high-level political ties, and intelligence suspicions. Despite the absence of conclusive evidence of his security rank, the extent of the overlaps with Israeli interests makes his file one of the most complex in the history of covert operations.

Another place, I don't like Israel, at all.

The deadline set by the Israeli occupation authorities for the evacuation of the 'Arraba Camp' area, located south of Jenin city in the occupied West Bank, ended today, Tuesday. This deadline came after field pressure exerted by occupation forces to compel Palestinian families in the area to immediately leave their lands and properties.

Field sources reported that occupation forces began pursuing Palestinian families residing at the entrance to Arraba town yesterday, threatening them with immediate arrest and confiscation of all their properties and livestock if they did not comply with the evacuation orders. The targeted area includes a number of simple structures used by families for sheep farming and agriculture.

Historically, the targeted area is known as 'Dothan Camp,' where it was a headquarters for the Jordanian army before the 1967 Naksa, before the occupation army took control of it and transformed it into a military barracks and settlement. The occupation remained in control of the site until 2005, when it withdrew as part of the 'disengagement plan' which included the Gaza Strip and four settlements in the northern West Bank.

Sources clarified that Palestinian families tried to obtain an additional grace period to safely transfer their properties and livestock, but the occupation authorities insisted on ending the deadline today, Tuesday. This intransigence led to the forced displacement of families who found themselves homeless after years of presence in these lands, which had regained their pastoral character after the 2005 evacuation.

Observers believe that the recent movements in Arraba are not merely routine security measures, but rather part of a broader strategy to re-impose full Israeli sovereignty over areas previously evacuated. Estimates indicate that the occupation seeks to reopen the military camp as a preparatory step for the permanent return of settlers to the area.

These developments coincide with an escalation in settler attacks, who have begun to move freely outside the fenced settlements in Jenin Governorate, threatening to turn Palestinian villages and towns into suffocated geographical enclaves. The current Israeli government supports these trends by providing legal and financial facilities to strengthen control over lands classified as 'C'.

This escalation reflects a fundamental change in the geopolitical landscape of the northern West Bank, as the occupation seeks to reduce the areas available to Palestinians to their lowest levels. These steps come in light of Israeli political decisions aimed at undermining any possibility of Palestinian geographical contiguity and transforming the West Bank into separate cantons under strict security and military control.

This measure comes within Israeli plans to return settlers to settlements evacuated in 2005, reflecting trends to control more Palestinian lands.

The "Order 9" organization, known in Hebrew as "Tsav 9," has emerged as an extremist Israeli protest movement primarily aimed at stopping the flow of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. This movement was founded on the initiative of settlers Reut and Yosef Ben Haim, who reside in the Netivot settlement in the Negev, to represent a hardline right-wing voice that links the humanitarian issue with the issue of prisoners.

The organization adopts the slogan "No aid until the last Israeli prisoner returns" as a fundamental pillar for its field activities. Its founders believe that introducing food and medicine contributes to prolonging the conflict and strengthening the capabilities of the resistance. The movement has translated this vision through a series of violent protests that included blocking main roads and preventing aid trucks from passing.

The movement's roots trace back to early 2024, specifically during a demonstration organized at the Kerem Shalom crossing on January 11, where the idea of imposing a popular siege parallel to the military siege crystallized. The first practical activity was recorded one day prior when Reut Ben Haim called via social media for an immediate demonstration to prevent trucks.

Ben Haim explained in press statements that the field action came as a result of the sight of convoys of trucks lined up at the border, which she considered a provocation to the families of the hostages. Since then, the movement has begun recruiting activists and reserve soldiers to expand its sphere of influence and pressure the Israeli government to cease its humanitarian obligations towards civilians in Gaza.

Organizationally, the movement held its expanded founding meeting in June 2024 in the "Visert Tzion" settlement, where systematic mechanisms were developed to use the truck blockade as a political pressure tool. This meeting came after a period of temporary suspension of its activity following clashes with Israeli police in various areas.

The name "Order 9" derives its meaning from Israeli military terminology, referring to reserve call-up orders, a symbolic reference that their activity is a continuation of military service through civilian means. A large number of soldiers who completed their service in Gaza participate in the movement, considering that preventing aid is part of the battle they began in military uniform.

Activists of the organization, including David Holtzman, emphasize that their actions are purely field-based and rely on direct confrontation with aid convoys. They believe that the participation of former soldiers who fought inside the Strip gives their movement additional legitimacy within Israeli society, especially in light of the acute political polarization.

Despite the movement's claim of not belonging to a specific political current, its composition reflects a close alliance between settlers, reserve soldiers, and national right-wing activists. The organization has received public support from Knesset members, such as Zvi Sukkot, who chairs a sensitive subcommittee in the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee, reflecting the penetration of its ideology into state institutions.

Support was not limited to parliament but extended to government ministers such as Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Minister of National Security, who has repeatedly expressed his support for the movement's demands. These political coverages have encouraged activists to escalate their field operations against trucks coming from Jordan and the West Bank.

Jerusalem and its surroundings witnessed the peak of the movement's activity in May 2024, where vital streets were closed to prevent the passage of international aid convoys. Their attacks also targeted strategic crossings such as Erez, Tarqumiya, and Allenby Bridge, in an attempt to cut off all aid arteries leading to the besieged Gaza Strip.

"Order 9" protests took on a destructive character on several occasions, with its elements involved in burning commercial and aid trucks near the cities of Hebron and Ramallah. The movement did not only target trucks but also besieged UNRWA offices in Jerusalem and prevented international staff from carrying out their duties.

International press reports, including a report by The Guardian, revealed a serious complicity between members of the Israeli army and movement activists. The reports indicated that soldiers leaked accurate information about the routes and locations of aid trucks to settlers, enabling them to intercept and attack them in advance.

The movement's spokeswoman, Rachel Touitou, confirmed the accuracy of the information regarding receiving signals from security and military personnel about convoy movements. This field cooperation raises major questions about the role of the military establishment in facilitating the tasks of pressure groups that use violence against international humanitarian aid.

In response to these practices, the US Treasury Department imposed financial sanctions on the "Tsav 9" organization in June 2024, describing it as a violent group. The US State Department affirmed that the organization caused obstruction and damage to vital humanitarian convoys, placing it under international prosecution for its continuous violations.

No aid until the last Israeli prisoner returns from Gaza.

Social media platforms are no longer just avenues for entertainment or news exchange; in recent years, they have transformed into alternative political spaces where public discourse is re-produced outside of official, censored channels. In this context, satirical digital content—from caricatures and short clips to recurring memes—has emerged as a new political language, especially in societies living under authoritarian regimes or prolonged coercive conditions.

This shift reflects an urgent societal need to find less costly and more effective tools of expression that can circumvent oppression, allowing individuals to reframe their relationship with authority and daily political reality.

Laughter as Symbolic Resistance

In environments where public spaces are closed and political expression is restricted, laughter becomes an indirect means of saying what cannot be said explicitly. Political satire here does not replace traditional protest, but acts as a symbolic gesture that helps dismantle the authority's prestige, strip away its sacred character, and transform it into a subject open to criticism and discussion.

Laughter provides individuals with a temporary psychological sense of superiority over an oppressive reality, breaking the barrier of fear that regimes seek to instill. This was clearly evident in numerous Arab experiences, most notably the political satire programs that spread after 2011, which played a significant role in expanding public debate and redefining the relationship between citizens and official discourse.

Political Awareness in the Digital Age

Younger generations increasingly rely on non-traditional digital media to understand politics. Satirical images and short clips not only convey information but also reframe it and connect it to daily life, making complex issues more understandable and engaging.

This type of content contributes to the production of alternative popular knowledge, weakening the official discourse's monopoly on meaning and opening up public discussions outside elitist frameworks. The impact of this phenomenon is not limited to the public; some regimes themselves have been forced to interact with this style, or attempt to employ it to re-produce their image in the digital space.

Satire in the Context of Hegemony and Occupation

In contexts of military hegemony and prolonged occupation, satirical content acquires a special dimension as a form of symbolic expression of daily rejection. In the Palestinian case, where military control intersects with restrictions on movement and expression, this content appears as a cultural tool to re-represent the imposed reality in a satirical language that alleviates its psychological burden, without engaging in direct confrontation.

This form of satire does not operate at the level of direct political action, but at the level of awareness and representation. It provides a space for collective expression of daily experience and reinforces the feeling that individual suffering is part of a shared social condition, which supports psychological and cultural resilience in an unequal reality.

This content also helps simplify complex issues—such as siege or administrative restrictions—and present them to a wider audience, especially young people who receive their political knowledge through digital media more than traditional media. This simplification is not necessarily aimed at incitement, but at breaking the monopoly of narrative and opening up space for reflection and discussion.

The Risks of Simplification and Turning Tragedy into Entertainment

Despite these roles, satirical content is not without real risks. The intensive use of satire can turn political and humanitarian issues into repetitive consumer material, where laughter becomes a means of adapting to reality instead of questioning it. Then, tragedy loses its moral weight and becomes a fleeting scene in the daily flow of content.

Likewise, satire can sometimes slip into reproducing stereotypes or symbolic violence when physical or social characteristics are used as a means of political insult, which undermines the critical objective of the content rather than enhancing it.

Between Resistance and Normalization

Satirical digital content is a political tool with a dual impact. On the one hand, it opens up spaces for expression, breaks fear, and contributes to reshaping collective consciousness outside official channels. On the other hand, it can turn into an adaptive mechanism that normalizes oppression and empties political action of its content when action is replaced by viewing, and anger by superficial interaction.

Ultimately, laughter cannot be viewed as an innocent or condemned act in itself. Its political value is determined by its context and the extent of its connection to critical awareness, not fleeting consumption. And between being a tool to expose authority or a means to coexist with it, the question remains open about the limits of satire and its role in shaping contemporary political consciousness.

Condemnation and denunciation are no longer meaningful, international appeals carry no weight, and they do not affect the reality on the ground in the face of a tsunami of settlement and Judaization decisions, and occupation and replacement policies. On the one hand, the occupation government continues its open war on the Palestinian people, and on the other hand, it issues decisions that undermine the unity of Palestinian geography and target the Palestinian existence with all its political, social, and economic components. These decisions nullify all international decisions based on the two-state solution and aimed at achieving a just peace. What Netanyahu's mini-cabinet approved not only contradicts international legitimacy decisions but also all Oslo agreements, the commitments of successive American administrations, what was signed in the White House, the commitments of the international community, and the recognition of states of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and to establish their state on all occupied territories in 1967.

Barren policies, flimsy plans, attempts at settlement replacement, an apartheid system, and pushing Palestinians towards displacement and exile, sometimes by military force and brutality, and sometimes by geographical, economic, educational, and health strangulation. The recent decisions came to crown the project of the far-right, who openly declare their intentions, the latest of which was Smotrich's statement yesterday, raising the slogan: "We bury the Palestinian state." This is one of the doors that howl day and night against everything Palestinian, pushing settlers to wreak havoc on the land under the protection of the occupation army.

Today, Palestine is experiencing an existential threat and a direct, declared targeting, from mass killing and extermination to siege, strangulation, confiscation, and Judaization. In the absence of serious and effective international action, and Arab and regional action, and under the bias of President Trump, those who lead the occupation government remain oblivious to international law and UN charters, adopting this racist policy as the only path, and an approach with fascist racist behavior, and a deeply extremist mentality.

In the face of what is happening, and in light of biased American policies, international weakness, and regional and Arab fragility, the Palestinian position remains oscillating between denunciation and condemnation. This condemnation, which the occupation government does not understand, means that the tools of action must change to suit the complex circumstances and reality, and that plans must be commensurate with the challenges; silence does not deter the occupier, and waiting will lead to more dangerous consequences, which necessitates moving from the square of reaction to effective action, and from the language of statements to tools of political, legal, and popular confrontation, and building a comprehensive national strategy based on unity of position, and activating all legitimate forms of pressure to protect the land and people, and restore consideration to the Palestinian cause as a just national liberation issue that does not lapse with time or erased by decisions of power and hegemony.

The Palestinian Vice President, Hussein Al-Sheikh, announced today, Tuesday, an official decision issued by the Palestinian leadership to absolutely forbid dealing with all measures and decisions approved by the occupation's mini-cabinet, 'the Cabinet,' regarding the occupied territories in the West Bank. This step comes in response to recent Israeli policies aimed at making radical changes in the legal and civil reality, serving to strengthen settlement control and undermine Palestinian sovereignty.

Al-Sheikh affirmed that the leadership has issued strict and severe instructions to all security agencies and civil institutions in the State of Palestine regarding the necessity of rejecting these measures and not dealing with them in any way. The instructions emphasized full adherence to the applicable Palestinian laws, based on international agreements signed between the two sides, as the sole reference for institutional and field work.

The Palestinian Presidency considered the recent Israeli decisions, especially the annulment of the Jordanian law that prevented the sale of land to Jews, as a clear undermining of all binding understandings and agreements. Al-Sheikh described these moves as a dangerous escalation directly aimed at destroying the two-state solution and dragging the entire region into a new spiral of tension and political and security instability.

Measures taken by the occupation government include declassifying land records in the West Bank, which allows for the disclosure of Palestinian owners' names and facilitates the leakage of land to settlement associations. Palestinian sources believe that this step aims to legitimize settlement expansion and provide legal cover for systematic seizure operations of private and public properties.

In a related context, the occupation's decisions included stripping the Palestinian municipality of Hebron of its building permit powers and transferring them to the so-called Israeli 'Civil Administration.' This measure is a blatant violation of the 'Hebron Protocol' signed in 1997, which regulates civil and security powers in the city, threatening to change the demographic and geographical identity of the city's historic heart.

Hussein Al-Sheikh called on the international community to take urgent action and adopt a firm stance to confront the aggression of the extremist right-wing government in Tel Aviv and its racist policies. He indicated that international silence encourages the occupation to continue implementing its plans aimed at the de facto annexation of the West Bank, coinciding with the ongoing genocide against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.

Official data indicates that this legal escalation is accompanied by a bloody field escalation in the West Bank, where at least 1112 martyrs have fallen since the start of the widespread aggression, in addition to thousands of injured and detained. Observers believe that these administrative and legal measures are nothing but a final prelude to officially announcing the annexation of the West Bank and imposing full Israeli sovereignty over it.

We have issued instructions to security and civil institutions to reject the recent occupation decisions and adhere to Palestinian law and signed agreements.

Israeli occupation forces committed a new massacre this Tuesday morning, resulting in the martyrdom of three Palestinians, including a woman. This came after an occupation army drone targeted a group of citizens in the central governorate of the Gaza Strip, causing destruction in the area and a state of panic among passersby.

Local sources reported that the airstrike directly targeted an electric motorcycle that was traveling on the vital Salah al-Din Street, specifically at the entrance to Al-Masdar village. The explosion caused a number of varying injuries among citizens who happened to be in the vicinity of the site at the moment of the aerial attack.

Immediately, ambulance and civil defense teams rushed to the targeted site to retrieve the bodies of the martyrs and evacuate the wounded from amidst the rubble. All victims were transferred to Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir al-Balah, where medical teams began providing urgent treatment to the injured amidst difficult health conditions suffered by the Strip.

In another field development, two Palestinians were injured by occupation forces' bullets in the Al-Zaytoun neighborhood, located southeast of Gaza City. Field sources clarified that the shootings targeted civilians in areas that do not witness a declared concentration of military vehicles, indicating the continuation of systematic sniping operations against residents in those axes.

These attacks come amid a continuous escalation in the Gaza Strip, where the occupation army continues to target civilians and simple means of transport in public streets. Medical reports confirm that the pace of direct bullet and aerial bombardment injuries doubles the pressure on the dilapidated health system in the central and northern areas.

The bombing targeted an electric motorcycle as it passed on Salah al-Din Street, specifically near the entrance to Al-Masdar village in the central Gaza Strip.

Israeli policy towards the West Bank has undergone a radical transformation following the government's approval to transfer extensive powers, historically exclusive to the occupation army, to civilian ministries led by ministers from the settler movement. This measure is not merely an increase in settlement activity; rather, it aims to institutionalize 'administrative annexation' by integrating the West Bank's administration into the civilian structure of the occupying state.

Through this administrative coup, the occupation authorities seek to reduce direct military involvement in the lives of the residents, in an attempt to circumvent international pressure and legal prosecution in international courts. Israel is betting on presenting the new reality as a regulatory or administrative dispute instead of a direct military occupation subject to international law.

New decisions include empowering settlement councils to receive massive and direct funding from the budgets of Israeli ministries, such as the Ministries of Transport, Housing, and Finance. This financial influx aims to develop settlement infrastructure without the need to go through the complex military channels that were previously followed.

This economic strategy aims to lower the cost of living in settlements and make living in the West Bank an attractive option for Israelis through massive government support. Israel thus seeks to achieve 'economic normalization' that makes settlement a profitable investment project openly supported by the state treasury.

In a step described as the most dangerous, the Israeli government abolished administrative restrictions that hindered the transfer of land ownership to settlers, turning the West Bank into something akin to an open 'real estate market'. This change allows individuals and intermediary companies to purchase land directly, transforming land from a strategic resource in a national conflict into a commodity subject to the laws of supply and demand.

Historically, lands in the West Bank were subject to complex Jordanian laws and military approvals that prevented sales to non-Arabs, but the new laws have overturned these rules. Through this step, Israel hopes to impose a demographic reality that is difficult to reverse, where settlement expansion becomes linked to private ownership protected by Israeli civil law.

Under these decisions, a parallel legal system has been established that fully applies Israeli laws within settlements, thereby entrenching an 'administrative apartheid' system. While settlers enjoy full citizenship rights and are subject to civil courts, their Palestinian neighbors remain subject to customary military rulings and administrative demolition laws.

This legal separation firmly establishes settler sovereignty through civil law, while entrenching Palestinian oppression through military force, creating two different judicial systems on the same geographical area. This step is a blatant violation of international conventions that prohibit changing prevailing laws in occupied territories to serve the occupying power.

This shift has provided legal cover for what has become known as 'pastoral settlement', where extensive powers are granted to settlers to control vast areas of land. This is done under various pretexts such as protecting antiquities or practicing grazing, which is an effective means of confiscating thousands of dunams without the need for official military decisions.

Among the dangerous field repercussions, the government decided to begin the work of law enforcement agencies belonging to the Civil Administration in Areas (A) and (B). These areas were administratively subject to the Palestinian Authority according to the 'Oslo II' agreement, meaning that the occupation will begin to carry out demolitions and prevent Palestinian development in the heart of cities and villages.

Observers believe that this Israeli administrative expansion represents the actual collapse of the Oslo Accords on the ground before their political collapse is announced. Direct intervention in Areas (A) and (B) strips the Palestinian Authority of its remaining sovereign powers and renders it merely an administrative structure without real authority on the ground.

Turning the West Bank into a real estate market and lifting restrictions on land purchases also aims to affect the real estate market within Israel by increasing the supply of settlement units. This economic link reinforces the dependence of the settlement economy on the comprehensive Israeli system and makes the idea of future separation almost impossible.

These measures confirm that the current Israeli government has moved from the stage of 'managing the conflict' to the stage of 'resolving the conflict' through civilian and legal tools. Control over land no longer requires only tanks and soldiers, but is now achieved through land registration offices, civil courts, and direct ministerial funding.

In conclusion, these decisions represent a strategic turning point aimed at creating irreversible facts in the West Bank in preparation for actual annexation. This administrative coup presents the international community with a new challenge, as Israel seeks to legitimize its occupation by transforming it into an integrated administrative and legal system that bypasses all signed agreements.

Israel seeks to impose a new demographic and geographical reality through purchase, not just military confiscation, making disengagement from these lands impossible in the future.

Dr. Khalil Tafakji: Demolition of homes in "Area A" for various pretexts indicates the absence of any effective sovereignty for the Palestinian Authority even in areas under its administration.

Salah Al-Khawaja: One of the most dangerous proposed steps is dealing with thousands of archaeological sites in the West Bank as biblical sites, along with accompanying Judaization projects.

Dr. Hassan Breijieh: Israel seeks to get rid of the Oslo Accords, and due to the difficulty of doing so, it is moving towards imposing facts on the ground through settlement expansion and gradual annexation.

Abdul Hadi Hantash: The withdrawal of service powers from Hebron Municipality and placing them under the sovereignty of "Kiryat Arba" Municipality was to prevent any Palestinian administration in H2 areas.

Dr. Abdul Nasser Makki: Opening land registry files is dangerous and allows direct purchase of properties from Palestinians, opening the door for expanding settlement influence.

Suhail Khalilieh: Allowing settlers to own land in the West Bank paves the way for widespread forgery operations, coinciding with demands for proof of ownership from Palestinians under impossible conditions.

Ramallah - Exclusive to "Al-Quds"-

Fears are growing over the repercussions of recent Israeli decisions regarding the withdrawal of powers from Hebron and Bethlehem municipalities, the expansion of intervention in areas classified as "A," and the individual registration of land ownership for settlers, considering them an indicator of a new phase of reordering control in the West Bank and its gradual annexation.

These measures include transferring administrative and religious responsibilities for sensitive sites such as the Ibrahimi Mosque and the Old City of Hebron, as well as Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque ("Rachel's Tomb") in Bethlehem, which is seen as a step contributing to reducing the role of Palestinian institutions in managing the affairs of these areas, according to experts, specialists, and officials in settlement affairs in separate discussions with "Al-Quds."

Experts, specialists, and officials believe that these developments show a trend towards subjecting religious and archaeological sites and areas to direct supervision by the Israeli Civil Administration, in parallel with the introduction of settlement expansion plans. The issue of demolishing buildings and opening land registries also raises concerns about legal changes that may affect land ownership and weaken the presence of the Palestinian Authority even in areas under its administration.

They point out that these policies fall within a broader path of imposing new facts on the ground that pave the way for gradual annexation, taking advantage of a complex regional and international political context.

Undermining Oslo and Seizing Palestinian Powers

Dr. Khalil Tafakji, an expert in settlement affairs, believes that the recent Israeli measures regarding the withdrawal of powers from municipalities and intervention in areas classified as "A" according to the Oslo Accords represent an advanced stage in undermining the agreement, and constitute "the final nail in Oslo's coffin," by reducing the powers of Palestinian institutions and re-imposing gradual Israeli control over these areas.

Dr. Tafakji explains that the withdrawal of powers from Hebron Municipality, including the Ibrahimi Mosque, practically means seizing powers from the Palestinian government, represented by the Ministry of Endowments, and transferring them to Israeli authorities.

Dr. Tafakji points out that planning areas under full Israeli control, such as the Ibrahimi Mosque area, the bus station, and Tel Rumeida, will be subject to settlement expansion plans under the supervision of the Israeli Civil Administration, without any role for the Palestinian Authority or Hebron Municipality in managing these areas.

Towards Legalizing Gradual Annexation

Dr. Tafakji affirms that the recent Israeli decisions reflect a trend towards legalizing and legitimizing the process of gradual annexation, noting that the approval of laws in the Knesset in the first and final readings gives them binding status and makes it difficult to reverse them.

Dr. Tafakji believes that these steps, including talk of demolishing homes in "Area A" under planning, environmental, or archaeological pretexts, indicate the absence of any effective sovereignty for the Palestinian Authority even in areas classified as under its administration.

Dr. Tafakji refers to the decision to expand the boundaries of Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque ("Rachel's Tomb") weeks ago, considering it an additional example of infiltration into "Area A" and imposing full control over religious sites, such as Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque, and withdrawing powers from Palestinian institutions.

Exploiting Religion for Political Goals

Dr. Tafakji believes that the use of religious sites, from the Ibrahimi Mosque to Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque, reflects the exploitation of religion to achieve political goals within a broader strategy of gradually re-establishing Israeli control.

Dr. Tafakji points out that the issue of antiquities constitutes another محور in this policy, citing the placement of archaeological areas such as Sebastia and Herodium under full Israeli control, including about 1800 dunams in Sebastia and about 70 dunams in Tuqu'.

Dr. Tafakji explains that the matter extends to nature reserves and other sites, where environmental, religious, and historical considerations are used as pretexts to re-establish control over areas that were under Palestinian control under Oslo, including sites such as Nabi Musa, which are now under full Israeli control.

Strategy of Imposing Occupation on "Area A"

Dr. Tafakji believes that all these measures indicate a clear strategy to gradually and systematically re-impose occupation on "Area A," considering that the timing, in light of recent Israeli political moves and the Israeli Prime Minister's visit to Washington, suggests an American consensus or support for these policies in the West Bank.

Fundamental Changes in the Status and Identity of Palestinian Lands

Salah Al-Khawaja, director of the Central Office of the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission and an expert in settlement affairs, confirms that the recent decisions and legislation issued by the Israeli Ministerial Committee for National Security Affairs ("the Cabinet") reflect the insistence of Benjamin Netanyahu's government and its ministers on making fundamental changes in the status and identity of Palestinian lands, in the context of a long-term project to impose new political and geographical realities that undermine the possibility of an independent Palestinian state.

A Historical Path of Israeli Expansion

Al-Khawaja explains that what is happening now is an extension of a historical path of Israeli expansion, noting that the international community has not taken firm stances since 1948 to stop a series of massacres and displacement operations that affected hundreds of Palestinian villages and towns, and later the expansion that solidified Israel's control over most of historical Palestine.

Al-Khawaja points out that the occupied territories after 1967 and since the first weeks of occupation, were followed by the forced displacement of the Maghariba Quarter in Jerusalem, then the accelerated Judaization of holy sites, including repeated attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque, without effective international deterrence.

Al-Khawaja points out that the annexation of Jerusalem constituted one of the most dangerous early annexation steps, followed by the adoption of projects aimed at reshaping Palestinian geography by dividing the occupied territories into separate cantons, including isolating the Gaza Strip, Jerusalem, and the Jordan Valley, and transforming the rest of the West Bank into fragmented areas, in an effort to weaken any components of a geographically contiguous Palestinian state.

Al-Khawaja believes that the experience of the Oslo Accords was a Palestinian attempt to find a path towards statehood, but subsequent Israeli policies showed the absence of a real Israeli partner for peace, and the continued defiance of successive Israeli governments to the international system and global contentment with positions of condemnation and denunciation.

Infringing on the Hebron Agreement

Al-Khawaja pauses at the recent decisions regarding the control and withdrawal of powers from Hebron and Bethlehem municipalities, considering them among the most dangerous issued by "the Cabinet," especially in Hebron.

Al-Khawaja confirms that they infringe on the arrangements stipulated in the Hebron Agreement and the division of the city into H1 and H2 areas.

Al-Khawaja points out that the H1 area, which constitutes about 75% of the Old City of Hebron, has witnessed years of closures, siege, and gradual Judaization, including the seizure of homes and the closure of about 1200 commercial establishments since 2002, in addition to imposing temporal and spatial division in the Ibrahimi Mosque and controlling most of its area.

Developing the Israeli Narrative on the West Bank

Al-Khawaja believes that the new proposals include developing the Israeli narrative on the West Bank from military occupation to "disputed territories," to considering the West Bank as "Judea and Samaria" areas, in parallel with settlement educational programs in a number of settlements to promote a more extreme discourse, in light of the activity of dozens of settler groups that carry out repeated attacks against Palestinians.

Al-Khawaja points out that one of the most dangerous proposed steps is also dealing with thousands of archaeological sites in the West Bank as biblical sites, and the accompanying Judaization projects, in addition to opening new roads to religious sites, such as Joseph's Tomb, without coordination with the Palestinian side.

Al-Khawaja considers that talk of the possibility of carrying out demolitions in areas classified (A) and (B) under the pretext of planning or archaeological changes represents a direct تجاوز of existing agreements and an attempt to impose broader control even in areas administratively subject to the Palestinian Authority.

Implications of Declassifying Land Ownership

Al-Khawaja warns of the implications of declassifying land ownership in these areas, considering that it may open the door to fraudulent seizure deals, in light of estimates indicating that a large percentage of land deals in the West Bank are tainted by forgery. Despite this, Al-Khawaja points to increasing international shifts in recognizing Palestinian rights, driven by global popular movement and some governmental positions, especially in Europe and Latin America.

Al-Khawaja calls for strengthening internal unity and adopting practical confrontation strategies, citing the experience of the First Intifada as a model for organized popular action, including tools such as civil disobedience, and benefiting from the international solidarity movement and boycott campaigns to pressure international institutions, especially the International Criminal Court, to open files related to settlement and consider them war crimes, in addition to a wide range of violations related to checkpoints and the settlement infrastructure.

Entrenchment of Creeping Annexation Policies

Dr. Hassan Breijieh, a researcher in settlement affairs, confirms that the measures of stripping powers from Hebron and Bethlehem municipalities and expanding into areas classified as "A," and the accompanying legitimization of control over lands and homes and carrying out demolitions within those areas, represent an entrenchment of creeping annexation policies, and constitute a clear violation of the rules of international law governing the relationship of the occupying power with the people under occupation.

Breijieh explains that the occupation, as an occupying power, does not have the right to own or expropriate according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Rome Statute, and the 1908 Hague Regulations, considering that the decisions of the Israeli Ministerial Committee for National Security Affairs ("the Cabinet") regarding expropriation and stripping of powers prove that the Israeli government is directly leading systematic policies that include genocide in Gaza and forced displacement in the West Bank.

Breijieh explains that these measures come within a planned strategy, through which the Israeli government seeks to make widespread field changes that reflect a trend towards ending the political framework that has existed for decades.

Practical Disposal of the Oslo Accords

Breijieh points out that Israel is practically seeking to get rid of the Oslo Accords, but it faces legal difficulty in officially canceling them, so it is moving towards imposing facts on the ground through settlement expansion and gradual annexation.

Breijieh believes that this stage represents, from the perspective of the Israeli government, a "golden period" to benefit from American support, a partner in forced displacement policies, in addition to European neutrality, Arab weakness, and Palestinian division, which are combined factors that encourage the acceleration of these policies.

Breijieh warns that the continuation of this path may lead to a widespread explosion whose consequences will be catastrophic for Palestinians, considering that the Israeli government is pushing towards expanding the scope of violence in the West Bank in a more bloody manner.

Breijieh explains that Palestinians remained a people under occupation even under the Oslo Accords, which regulated the Palestinian-Israeli relationship, pointing out that the benefits for Palestinians were limited compared to what Israel achieved, which now sees it as an obstacle to its settlement and colonial projects, despite the difficulty of legally canceling it after the regional arrangements that resulted from it.

Institutionalization of Israeli Policies

Regarding archaeological and endowment areas, including the Ibrahimi Mosque, Breijieh stresses that they are facilities and properties protected by international law, and that the duty of the occupying power requires preserving them, not confiscating them or exploiting them for tourism.

Breijieh believes that the announcements issued by ministers in the Israeli government regarding ending municipal powers and canceling existing laws reflect the nature of an extremist right-wing government that is working to institutionalize these policies and transform them into a systematic approach.

Empowering Settlers to Control Strategic Sites

Abdul Hadi Hantash, an expert specializing in land and settlement affairs, confirms that the recent decisions issued by the Israeli Cabinet regarding the withdrawal or restriction of powers of Hebron and Bethlehem municipalities are part of a broader project of Israeli control over the West Bank, and aim to enable settlers to gain full control over strategic and religious sites, including the Ibrahimi Mosque and Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque, which Israel calls "Rachel's Tomb."

Hantash explains that the Israeli occupation several years ago included about 400 targets in what it called "Jewish heritage," and the process of controlling the Ibrahimi Mosque and Bilal Mosque began gradually, with the Israeli flag being raised on both sites, which gave the green light to settlers to control these areas and expand their influence in the surrounding Palestinian neighborhoods.

Imposing Hegemony over Palestinian Areas

Hantash points out that the goal of these measures is not merely to control religious sites, but to impose civil and administrative hegemony over Palestinian areas, and to impose laws and policies that directly serve settlement expansion.

Hantash affirms that the withdrawal of service powers from Hebron Municipality and placing them under the sovereignty of "Kiryat Arba" Municipality was to prevent any Palestinian administration in H2 areas, which include settlement outposts in the heart of the city and the "Kharsina" settlement established north of Kiryat Arba.

Hantash explains that this step represents deliberate pressure on Palestinian citizens in the Old City of Hebron, by imposing new taxes and powers that are difficult to absorb, which may push some residents to leave their homes, which is part of a policy aimed at gradually emptying the city of its original inhabitants.

Annexation of the West Bank as a Reality

Hantash points out that the Israeli occupation exploited the Oslo Accords to expand settlements and impose facts on the ground, stressing that the actual annexation of the West Bank has become a reality today, as Israeli civil law is applied to Palestinian lands, which transfers the West Bank from being occupied territories under international law to a legal status similar to Israeli cities such as Tel Aviv, which constitutes a radical change in the political and legal reality of the region.

Hantash explains that these measures have contributed to the daily increase in settler attacks on Palestinians, including killings, looting, land seizures, tree cutting, and building demolitions, with the implementation of settlement projects without any need to refer to Palestinian municipalities, as happened in the Hisba market in the Old City of Hebron, where a large settlement project was implemented after the municipality constituted a legal obstacle to its implementation.

Hantash believes that the upcoming meeting between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may not change these decisions on the Palestinian reality, given internal and external Israeli pressures, noting that Israel is exerting strategic pressures, exploiting international issues such as the Epstein file and others to achieve its goals in the West Bank.

Necessity of Moving Beyond Traditional Condemnation Statements

Hantash urges Palestinian citizens to stand firm against these policies, stressing that the actual response must go beyond traditional condemnation statements, and include effective political and international action, by pressuring the Palestinian Authority to strengthen its legal and diplomatic presence, and explaining the Palestinian issue to international parties to prevent the occupation from implementing its Judaization plans, and emphasizing that what is happening represents an existential threat to Palestinian cities and their residents in Hebron, Bethlehem, and various areas of the West Bank.

According to Hantash, the current stage requires unifying Palestinian and international efforts to confront the increasing Israeli control over the West Bank, and working to protect Palestinian rights and prevent settlement expansion, which has become a direct threat to Palestinian existence on the ground.

Strengthening Settler Control in Hebron

Dr. Abdul Nasser Makki, a researcher in settlement and Jordan Valley affairs, warns of the danger of the decisions taken by the Israeli government regarding the transfer of parts of the West Bank to areas under Israeli civil administration, especially regarding the transfer of powers of Hebron Municipality and the administration of the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron and the transfer of its responsibility to the Israeli Civil Administration, in addition to intensifying gates, checkpoints, and Judaization measures in the Old City of Hebron.

Makki believes that these steps aim to strengthen settler control in Hebron, and constitute a direct blow to the concept of peace and the foundations of the Oslo Accords, leading to the weakening of the Palestinian National Authority.

Makki explains that these decisions contradict the arrangements of the Hebron Agreement of 1997, which granted Hebron Municipality responsibilities related to the Ibrahimi Mosque and its surroundings, pointing out that the withdrawal of these powers will lead to a comprehensive change in the reality of the area, and will give settlers freedom of movement and broader control without the intervention of any other party, thus entrenching a reality controlled by settler authority.

Opening Land Registries to Expand Settlement Influence

Makki affirms that opening land registry files in the West Bank to Israelis represents a dangerous development, because it allows direct purchase operations of lands and properties from Palestinians, and opens the door for expanding settlement influence at the expense of the Authority's powers.

Makki believes that the final approval of these measures practically means ending the Oslo phase and pushing towards the reality of Palestinian cantons, indicating the beginning of the implementation of the annexation project.

Makki points out that the Israeli government is proceeding with these policies despite previous American warnings about annexation, considering that there is a division of roles within the Israeli government in the timing of the implementation of these decisions before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to the United States.

Annexation to Keep the Palestinian Authority Weak

Makki explains that Israel seeks to gradually annex the West Bank while maintaining a weak Palestinian authority that performs limited administrative functions, pointing out that the influence of the Israeli Civil Administration now effectively extends from areas (C) and (B) and affects aspects of areas (A), including water issues, antiquities, and building demolitions, which means the expansion of Israeli control beyond the traditional classifications of areas.

Makki calls for a shift in Palestinian and Arab positions from condemnation to practical action, through an urgent Arab meeting to confront these policies, in addition to the necessity of a clear American stance that prevents their continuation due to their repercussions on regional stability.

Palestinian, Makki stresses the importance of a comprehensive meeting of the PLO Executive Committee with the participation of all factions, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, with the aim of unifying ranks in confronting challenges that threaten the future of the Palestinian land and state.

Opening the Door to Widespread Forgery Operations

Suhail Khalilieh, a researcher in settlement affairs, warns that the recent Israeli decisions to withdraw powers from Hebron and Bethlehem municipalities, and to open the way for settlers to own land in the West Bank, represent a dangerous shift aimed at entrenching settlement control over vast areas, especially in areas classified as (C), with direct implications for the legal and geographical realities in the Palestinian territories.

Khalilieh explains that the decision regarding allowing individual settlers to directly purchase lands in various areas of the West Bank, including areas classified according to the Oslo Accords (A), (B), and (C), practically targets areas (C) in particular, due to their large area and strategic importance.

Khalilieh explains that the danger of this step lies in opening the door to widespread forgery operations, coinciding with Israeli plans to register lands in those areas, where landowners are required to provide proof of ownership under conditions he described as impossible for Palestinians.

Khalilieh points out that since 1967, Israel has stopped most land registration and transfer operations outside municipal boundaries, leaving vast areas registered in the names of owners since the Jordanian era, many of whom have died decades ago, and as a result, the number of heirs in many cases has doubled to dozens or hundreds of people, which facilitates the passage of suspicious deals.

Khalilieh affirms that the inability of owners to provide the required documents opens the way for classifying these lands as "state lands," which grants the competent Israeli authorities the power to dispose of them and transfer them to settlements or settlers, with the issuance of official ownership deeds to them at the expense of Palestinians, noting that these measures indicate that they have been planned since the occupation of the West Bank.

Towards Redrawing the Map of the West Bank

Regarding the withdrawal of powers from Hebron Municipality, Khalilieh explains that the goal is to empty the Hebron Agreement of its content, by transferring the powers of the Old City and the Ibrahimi Mosque to the Israeli Civil Administration, in preparation for granting the (H2) area an independent administrative status as a settlement council with planning and construction powers.

Khalilieh points out that this means enabling about 800 settlers to control the area surrounded by more than 120 checkpoints, after years of weakening economic activity, displacing Palestinian families, and expanding settler influence.

Khalilieh points out that the same scenario applies to the area of Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque ("Rachel's Tomb") in Bethlehem, where it is expected to be granted self-settlement administration in preparation for its annexation to the "Greater Jerusalem" plan and its attachment to the Israeli Jerusalem Municipality.

Khalilieh believes that these measures go beyond being separate administrative decisions, and constitute part of a comprehensive political project to redraw the map in the West Bank.

Khalilieh stresses that confronting these developments requires a comprehensive political solution with international intervention because it is a political issue, considering that legal tools and international decisions have become limited in their impact in light of current Israeli policies.

Khalilieh calls for launching serious political action that leads to an international conference that re-raises pending issues within a clear and realistic agreement framework, stressing that dealing with each file separately is no longer effective in confronting a broad project that targets the future of the Palestinian territories.

Human rights and field sources reported that Israeli occupation forces launched a widespread arrest campaign since dawn on Tuesday, targeting more than 30 Palestinians, including children, in various areas of the occupied West Bank. The raids focused on cities in the north and center, where military vehicles stormed several residential neighborhoods amidst strict security measures that included firing gas and sound bombs at the homes of unarmed citizens.

In Qalqilya city, the military operation continued for more than five consecutive hours, during which occupation soldiers conducted field surveys and photographed streets and alleys before withdrawing. The raids also targeted the cities of Jenin and Nablus, in addition to the towns of Siris, Maysalun, and Al-Laban Al-Sharqiya, where six citizens were arrested from the latter village alone after thorough searches of homes and tampering with their contents.

In the central and southern West Bank, the occupation army stormed the cities of Bethlehem and Jericho, and the town of Al-Mughayyir northeast of Ramallah, while the town of Ni'lin was subjected to four consecutive raids during the past hours. Local sources confirmed that occupation soldiers deliberately destroyed household furniture and closed town entrances, hindering the movement of citizens and causing a state of extreme tension among residents.

In occupied Jerusalem, the occupation police completely closed the vital 'Dahiyat Roundabout' near Beit Hanina town, which is a crucial passage for Palestinians holding Jerusalem IDs heading to the city center. This closure coincided with the storming of Silwan town south of Al-Aqsa Mosque, where municipal and police teams raided commercial shops and began implementing restrictive measures against business owners and residents.

These escalations come amidst a continuous increase in the pace of security pursuits since October 2023, with official data indicating the arrest of more than 21,000 Palestinians since that date. According to the latest updates from the Prisoner's Club, more than 9,300 prisoners are currently held in occupation prisons, living in harsh conditions, including 58 female prisoners and 350 children facing systematic punitive measures.

Occupation forces stormed most West Bank cities since dawn, carrying out field surveys and home raids.

Israeli occupation forces escalated their field attacks this Tuesday morning, resulting in the martyrdom of three Palestinians and the injury of several others in various areas of central and northern Gaza Strip. Medical sources confirmed the arrival of the bodies of two martyrs at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital following a direct targeting on Salah al-Din Street, while a Palestinian citizen was killed by occupation bullets in Al-Masdar village.

In Gaza City, sources from Al-Shifa Hospital reported injuries among citizens due to gunfire from occupation forces stationed around the Al-Zaytoun neighborhood. This coincided with intense artillery shelling targeting residential neighborhoods in Beit Lahia city, northern Gaza Strip, leading to injuries among civilians who were transported to nearby ambulance and emergency centers.

On the ground, the occupation army carried out extensive and massive demolition operations, targeting entire residential blocks in the eastern areas of Khan Yunis city, southern Gaza Strip. Systematic destruction operations also affected buildings in Gaza City, as the occupation seeks to erase the features of residential areas within its ground incursion.

Jabalya refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, witnessed a dangerous development, as 'quadcopter' drones dropped explosive boxes over the remaining partially destroyed Palestinian homes. These operations aim to prevent displaced people from returning or settling in areas that have been subjected to invasion in recent weeks.

At sea, Israeli warships participated in the aggression by firing their machine guns heavily towards the coasts of Rafah and Khan Yunis cities. This naval shelling was accompanied by movements of military vehicles in the eastern areas, increasing the state of tension and displacement in those areas.

In a recent statistic, the government media office in Gaza revealed that 573 martyrs have fallen and more than 1,500 others have been injured by occupation fire since the ceasefire agreement last October. These figures reflect the continued direct targeting of civilians despite declared understandings, exacerbating the humanitarian catastrophe in the Strip.

On the health level, medical authorities in Gaza issued an urgent distress call, warning of a complete halt to laboratory services and blood banks in hospitals. This threat comes as a result of the depletion of essential laboratory materials and medical solutions due to the severe blockade that prevents the arrival of necessary supplies.

For his part, the Director-General of the Ministry of Health, Munir Al-Barsh, explained that the deficit in medicines and medical consumables has reached about 46%. He pointed out in statements to media sources that this severe shortage puts the lives of thousands of wounded and sick people at risk, especially in light of the destruction of hospital infrastructure.

In light of this crisis, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees 'UNRWA' announced a positive step by reopening the Al-Bureij Health Center in the central Strip. The center aims to provide basic health services to thousands of displaced people after being closed for several months due to ongoing military operations.

Despite these attempts to alleviate suffering, the humanitarian situation in Gaza remains prone to further deterioration amid continued airstrikes and artillery shelling. Human rights organizations demand the permanent opening of crossings to ensure the flow of medical and food aid to save what can be saved of civilian lives.

Lack of medicines and medical equipment exposes many patients and wounded to the risk of certain death amid the continued obstruction of aid entry.

Tehran intensified its diplomatic moves in the region ahead of an anticipated visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Washington, where the Iranian Foreign Ministry warned of pressures and influences it described as destructive, aimed at undermining ongoing diplomatic efforts. The Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Ismail Baqaei, affirmed that the responsibility lies with the United States to make independent decisions away from interventions that harm regional stability.

In this context, Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, began a tour that included the Qatari capital Doha and the Sultanate of Oman, as part of a pre-planned program to strengthen bilateral relations and regional consultations. These visits come to complete the diplomatic path related to the nuclear file, as Tehran seeks to ensure the support of neighboring countries for the dialogue process and reduce the intensity of escalating tensions.

Iran's Foreign Ministry stressed that the Israeli regime has proven on several occasions its opposition to any diplomatic process that could lead to peace in the region, describing it as a disruptive party. Sources clarified that the current Iranian move aims to block any attempts to obstruct potential understandings between Tehran and international powers, especially in light of the intensive Israeli activity in Washington.

Baqaei pointed out that the fundamental problem lies in the seriousness of the American administration in returning to the right path, especially after previous experiences described by Tehran as bitter. He noted that last year's talks ended with attempts at military action, which necessitates a comprehensive and accurate assessment by the Iranian side before proceeding with any new steps.

The Sultanate of Oman is considered a vital center for these talks, where Tehran appreciated Muscat's historical role in mediation and its continuous efforts to bridge viewpoints. The current discussions in the Sultanate are taking place in an atmosphere described as positive, with Iran emphasizing its commitment to red lines that prevent discussing any files outside the framework of the nuclear program.

In parallel with the political movement, Iran affirmed the continuation of its consultations with active countries in the region, including Egypt, Turkey, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, to ensure comprehensive regional stability. Tehran believes that the security of the region must stem from the cooperation of its countries, away from external interventions aimed at inciting conflicts or imposing specific agendas.

On the military front, the commander of the Iranian Air Force announced that the armed forces are on high alert and fully prepared to confront any aggressive action that may target the country. These statements come as a deterrent message coinciding with political pressures, to emphasize that the diplomatic option does not mean a weakening of the Islamic Republic's defensive posture.

In the context of strengthening trust with neighboring countries, the Iranian Minister of Defense visited Azerbaijan to discuss military cooperation in the South Caucasus region. These moves aim to build a regional security system based on mutual trust and contribute to promoting peace and stability away from border tensions.

Iran's Foreign Ministry reiterated its emphasis on the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, noting that it is seriously striving to remove any artificial global concerns about possessing nuclear weapons. It called on Washington to focus on actions, not words, stressing the need to curb the practices of lobbies that try to sabotage the course of diplomatic talks.

Informed sources reported that recent meetings between Iranian and American officials, including the meeting between Araghchi and Witkoff, showed an understanding on Washington's part of the necessity of continuing dialogue. However, Tehran remains wary of potential contradictions in American policy, insisting that the lesson lies in the actual implementation of international commitments.

The party we are negotiating with is the United States, and the decision is theirs to act independently of the destructive pressures and influences that harm the region.