The repeated incursions into Birzeit University are clear and blatant evidence that Palestinian universities bother and anger them, because they are beacons of knowledge and learning, national strongholds that carry the country's ideology, and raise its intellectual and scientific banners in the world in the name of Palestine. They compete and excel in many fields, achieve important ranks, and provide knowledge in the fields of science, development, and artificial intelligence, supplying Palestinian society with creative energies and innovations in various fields. For this reason, we find the occupation raiding universities, wreaking havoc on property, intellectual and educational tools, and classrooms, arresting students, and firing bullets and poisonous gas bombs at students and professors, in revenge against the educational institutions that build the Palestinian individual, refine them with science, knowledge, and experience, and push them to be a worthy builder for the present and future.

And it is not far-fetched, as Gaza's universities were bombed by warplanes, some of them completely destroyed, and no college, institute, or university was spared, just as schools and kindergartens were not spared from bombing, burning, and destruction.

The incident of raiding Birzeit University two days ago is not the first, nor is it the only university against which such tampering and sabotage are practiced. All universities are subjected to such heinous aggressions, which the occupation sees as national strongholds, and they are indeed fortified with science, knowledge, and human development. This drives the occupation to repeatedly raid all universities and engage in deliberate sabotage, and it goes beyond that to even more absurd acts, with abuse and beating of students, professors, and all staff working at the university.

A few days before the raid on Birzeit University, Al-Quds University witnessed a similar raid, and convoys of military tanks and soldiers heavily armed with equipment and weapons entered the university campus. The university squares turned into a military barracks, and the soldiers practiced intimidation as they indulged in their hobby of firing bullets, gas, and smoke bombs. In every university in the homeland that is raided, the scene turns into something resembling a battlefield, with heavily armed soldiers and unarmed students and academic professors.

These incursions have no justification other than being the doctrine of the army that continues its rampage against everything Palestinian, in the university as in the field and factory, and on the roads and through retaliatory military checkpoints that abuse people and disrupt their lives. In light of all this, and in the absence of serious international intervention to protect the Palestinian people from this brutal arrogance, Palestinians must face their destiny and confront these policies aimed at disturbing people's lives with repressive and humiliating measures, where no one is safe from these practices, and the evidence is daily and repeated, across the entire land with its cities, villages, and camps.

An affirmation of his human and athletic presence, far from being reduced to just a name on the lists of martyrs.

Is this how I am rewarded after dedicating my life and youth as a teacher in the organization?

News Analysis

Veteran Democratic Congressman from Maryland, Steny Hoyer, announced on Thursday his intention to retire after more than four decades in the U.S. Congress. Hoyer's retirement from the House of Representatives not only marks the end of a long political career but also opens a wide door for a re-evaluation of the role of one of the most prominent architects of the special relationship between the United States and Israel within the American legislative institution. Hoyer, who held high leadership positions in the House of Representatives and was known as AIPAC's primary man, was for many years a symbol of what is known as the "pro-Israel consensus" within the Democratic Party, and a central link between the party leadership and pro-Tel Aviv lobbying groups, foremost among them AIPAC.

Since his election in 1981, Hoyer established himself as a pragmatic, centrist politician, but on the issue of Israel, he adopted a firm and unequivocal stance: unconditional support for military aid, and providing political and diplomatic cover for Israeli policies, even when they clearly contradicted international law or the stated American discourse on the two-state solution. This steadfastness was not merely an ideological position, but part of an integrated structure of influence, in which Hoyer used his leadership position to guide internal party debate and contain critical voices, especially with the rise of the progressive wing.

One of the most significant manifestations of this influence was his repeated leadership of congressional delegations to Israel, trips that were organized and funded through the "American Israel Education Foundation" (AIEF), an arm associated with the AIPAC lobby. These trips, often held every two years during parliamentary recesses, became a semi-institutional political ritual, involving a large number of newly elected representatives in each election cycle (usually in August of every other year).

These trips were not merely protocol visits; they were carefully designed to shape the mindset of new representatives regarding "Israel's security" and "regional threats," through field tours and meetings with military leaders and Israeli officials, in contrast to a limited – or symbolic – presence of the Palestinian narrative. Under Hoyer's leadership, these delegations acquired an organized partisan character, as they were seen as part of the process of integrating new representatives into the "traditional parliamentary consensus" on supporting everything Israel does, including the Israeli war of annihilation.

Here lies the fundamental problem: while these trips are presented as legitimate educational activities, observers see them as a form of effective soft influence exercised by lobbying groups, especially when targeting legislators early in their political careers, before their independent positions are solidified. In this context, Hoyer played the role of "political guarantor" of this process, leveraging his organizational weight and his close ties with pro-Israel campaign donors.

However, recent years have witnessed a clear crack in this model. With the escalation of criticism within the Democratic Party of Israeli policies in Gaza and the West Bank, and with increasing talk about settlements and human rights, the number of new representatives participating in these trips has begun to decline. Some Democrats have also openly declared their refusal to accept AIPAC support, indicating a gradual shift in party sentiment, especially among young people and progressive voters.

Hoyer's departure, at this particular time, carries deep symbolic significance. It not only means the exit of an influential figure but also indicates the decline of an entire political generation that viewed supporting Israel as a matter beyond partisan debate. With his absence, the debate within the Democratic Party is expected to intensify regarding the conditions of military aid, the limits of the relationship with the Israeli government, and the role of lobbying groups in shaping American foreign policy.

The model of funded trips (for new representatives and their families) to Israel demonstrates how political influence can be exercised without direct legislation or pressure. Personal experience, when carefully crafted and presented at an early political moment, becomes an effective tool for reproducing long-term political positions. Hoyer's role here was not only organizational but also educational in its political sense, as he contributed to "forming" generations of legislators with a single vision of the conflict.

It should be noted that the shift within the Democratic Party does not necessarily mean a break with Israel, but rather reflects a growing desire to redefine the relationship away from blind alignment. Resistance to this shift by traditional leaders like Hoyer delayed the debate, but did not stop it. With his exit from the scene, critical voices may find more space to link American support to human rights values and international law.

The most important aspect of Hoyer's retirement is not what has ended, but what may begin. The question now is: will new leaders fill the void and reproduce the same model, or does the political moment allow for a genuine review of the role of lobbies in guiding foreign policy? The answer will determine the future of the American debate on Israel, and perhaps redraw the boundaries of the "consensus" that governed Washington for decades.

At a Palestinian moment burdened by complex crises, where occupation intertwines with division, and politics recedes before the management of daily crises, political awareness emerges as an urgent and undeniable need. However, the fundamental question is no longer: Do we need awareness? Rather, what kind of awareness do we want, and for what political mind is it intended? Between an excess of discourse and a scarcity of critical thinking, the paradox appears stark in the current Palestinian scene.

Political awareness, in its deep meaning, is not a transfer of information nor a reproduction of slogans, but a critical practice aimed at rebuilding the relationship between reality and the possibilities of changing it. However, what is often presented today does not go beyond describing the predicament or adapting to it, without radical questioning of its causes or serious thought about ways out of it. Here lies the flaw: when awareness turns into a repetitive explanation of what we already know, it loses its ability to make a real impact on collective consciousness.

In the Palestinian context, political awareness cannot be separated from its responsibility to expose the mechanisms of producing helplessness, whether imposed from outside or accumulated internally. Insisting on attributing every imbalance solely to the external factor, despite its centrality, exempts local political and social structures from any accountability, and weakens society's ability to honestly review its experience. And consciousness that does not practice self-criticism quickly turns into defensive consciousness, justifying more than it changes.

As for the Palestinian intellectual, they find themselves facing a delicate equation: how to maintain their intellectual independence in a highly polarized environment, without their criticism turning into a position of isolation or misunderstanding? However, the gravity of the stage dictates that the critical mind should not be content with balanced analysis, but should contribute to expanding the horizon of public debate, and restore the importance of a culture of questioning and accountability, as two essential conditions for any conscious political action.

From here, talking about the “possible” becomes an intellectual necessity, not a theoretical luxury. The Palestinian possible is not what we wish for, nor what the moment alone allows, but what can be gradually built through a precise understanding of the balance of power, and an accumulation of social awareness capable of transforming knowledge into action. It is a possible that takes shape when we realize the limits of power and the limits of discourse together, and when we distinguish between political realism and surrender disguised in the language of rationality.

The biggest challenge facing political awareness today lies not in the scarcity of platforms, but in the narrow ceiling within which thought is allowed to move. When political discussion is reduced to improving the conditions of the existing reality, without raising fundamental questions about its alternatives, consciousness becomes a tool of control, not a tool of liberation. And awareness that does not disturb assumptions or stimulate different thinking risks becoming part of the problem it seeks to address.

The Palestinian possible begins with restoring confidence in the mind, and in its ability to understand and influence, and with reconnecting knowledge with political and social action. When a Palestinian understands their position in the conflict, and comprehends its complexities without exaggeration or simplification, they become more capable of resisting misinformation, and less susceptible to being drawn behind emotional or simplistic discourse.

In conclusion, political awareness is not an elitist discourse delivered from above, but an interactive process that accumulates consciousness and restores the importance of collective action. In a time when questions multiply and ready answers narrow, the reliance remains on a critical mind that sees thinking itself as a form of resistance, and in expanding the horizon of the possible as a condition for any viable national liberation project.

The occupation army considered the firing of rockets from Gaza to constitute a "flagrant violation of the ceasefire agreement."

This project represents the practical implementation of the Israeli annexation plan for the area classified as "E1", as it aims to achieve complete geographical continuity between the "Ma'ale Adumim" settlement and occupied Jerusalem.

Local sources reported that among the martyrs who died as a result of the bombing were children.

Sharek Youth Forum organized today, Thursday, a field tour for local, Arab, and international media in the Youth Village, with the aim of direct observation of the violations and coercive measures to which the village and its surroundings are subjected.

During the journey to the village, Israeli occupation forces and settlers detained the Palestine TV crew, before violations escalated immediately upon the arrival of the media delegation to the Youth Village, where occupation forces, accompanied by settlers, stormed the village, detained journalists and the Sharek Youth Forum crew, and subjected them to a field investigation.

The occupation forces informed the detainees that the Youth Village is located within what is called "Area C," and declared the place a closed military zone for 24 hours, despite the fact that approximately 70% of the Youth Village's lands are classified within "Area (B)," and without presenting any military order or legal decision justifying this declaration or permitting the prevention of entry or the exercise of civilian activities, which constitutes a blatant violation of international law and the provisions of signed agreements.

Sharek Youth Forum affirms that the Youth Village is a civilian educational and community facility protected under the rules of international humanitarian law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits targeting civilian objects, or converting them into military targets, or imposing arbitrary restrictions on workers, visitors, and journalists.

The forum emphasizes that this assault comes in the context of a systematic policy pursued by the occupation authorities aimed at restricting Palestinian civilian spaces, preventing youth and community work, restricting media and press freedom, and imposing coercive realities on the ground by declaring civilian areas as closed military zones without a legal basis.

Sharek Youth Forum calls on local, Arab, and international media to continue monitoring what is happening in the Youth Village, intensify professional coverage, and convey the reality of the violations occurring in this civilian area, thereby ensuring the public's right to know, and contributing to the protection of Palestinian civilian spaces from targeting and demolition.

These violations constitute a clear breach of the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the occupying power from destroying or targeting civilian property, and also violates the rules of international humanitarian law related to the protection of civilians and civilian installations.

Netanyahu informed his ministers that Trump gave him 'the green light' to attack Lebanon, claiming Hezbollah refused to disarm.

Every ticket sold is a clear message that "Palestine deserves to be seen and heard."

Invitations are currently being extended to key countries to participate in the Peace Council.

Unlike Palestine, Somaliland is not a virtual state. It is an existing and effective state.

The movement described this measure as "unjust," asserting that it violates the employment rights of hundreds of workers whose return was prevented by the war conditions and the occupation's closure of the Rafah crossing.

The child Hamsa Hawsou (11 years old) was martyred due to gunfire from occupation vehicles in the Faluja area of Jabalia.

The repercussions of the "Al-Aqsa Flood" have gone beyond the military and security frameworks, extending to the scientific and intellectual depth of the occupying state.

The 272nd Emirati humanitarian convoy, part of Operation "Gallant Knight 3", entered the Gaza Strip, carrying approximately 387 tons of food parcels, marking the first shipments arriving from the Mohammed bin Rashid Humanitarian ship to the Strip.

The "Mohammed bin Rashid Humanitarian" ship had docked in Al-Arish port last week, carrying food aid designated to meet urgent needs in Gaza, including approximately 10 million meals provided by Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Global Initiatives, as part of the continuous Emirati efforts to enhance food security and support the most affected groups.

Mohammed Al Kaabi, the media coordinator for Operation "Gallant Knight 3" in Al-Arish, stated that "the Emirati humanitarian aid team in Al-Arish city works day and night, around the clock, to ensure aid reaches its beneficiaries in Gaza as quickly as possible. The team has made great efforts in unloading, discharging, and preparing the cargo of the Mohammed bin Rashid Humanitarian ship since its arrival in Al-Arish, with the first batches of its cargo entering Gaza a week after the ship's arrival." 

The arrival of the convoy is part of an integrated logistical system supervised by the Emirati humanitarian aid team in Al-Arish city, starting from unloading the ship's cargo according to organized operating procedures, then transferring the shipments to the Emirati Humanitarian Aid Logistics Center in Al-Arish to complete the technical processing stages, where the team works around the clock to ensure speed of execution, accuracy of procedures, and safety of materials.

At the logistics center, parcels are inspected, sorted, and checked for readiness, with any damaged shipments re-packaged according to precise standards that consider content quality and validity, before storing the aid inside warehouses according to their classification and type, ensuring ease of preparation and accelerating response to field needs.

After completing the inspection, sorting, and storage stages, food items are prepared within the humanitarian supply chain for successive transfer to the Gaza Strip via Emirati humanitarian aid convoys, as part of continuous efforts to secure relief support and meet the basic needs of Palestinian brethren.

It is worth noting that Operation "Gallant Knight 3" continues its humanitarian efforts to support the Palestinian people, through an integrated relief system that includes operating land convoys, airlifts, and sea shipments, and implementing relief, health, and food projects and initiatives, reflecting the UAE's steadfast commitment to supporting brethren and alleviating their suffering.

In a delicate political moment, the United States is moving to redraw the path of the Gaza ceasefire agreement by pushing for the start of its second phase, without pre-linking it to the disarmament of the Hamas movement or the recovery of the body of the last Israeli hostage killed during the war. This approach, which the administration of US President Donald Trump informed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about, reflects a tactical shift in Washington's approach to the issue, and at the same time reveals a growing gap between American priorities and Israeli concerns.

The second phase of the agreement, according to the American vision, goes beyond the immediate security dimension to address more complex issues, most notably the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, its post-war administration arrangements, and the launch of a political-economic path aimed at stabilizing the calm and preventing a rapid return to confrontation. However, Netanyahu's government still believes that any progress in this path must be conditional on achieving two clear goals: recovering the remains of hostage Ran Gvili, and completely disarming Hamas.

The United States, for its part, is not backing down from its commitment to these two goals, according to a source for Al-Quds newspaper, but it refuses to make them a hindering condition. Washington, according to informed sources, has become convinced that linking reconstruction and moving Gaza to the “post-war” phase with highly complex issues such as weapons and hostages will practically lead to political paralysis, and perhaps to the collapse of the already fragile ceasefire.

In this context, the US administration intensified its contacts with regional mediators, especially Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey, who conveyed assurances that Hamas might agree to a gradual disarmament process, starting with giving up heavy weapons, and accompanied by a program to buy light weapons from fighters. However, this proposal still faces Israeli reservations, in light of public assurances from Hamas leadership that its weapons will not be subject to negotiation except within a comprehensive political settlement leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

In parallel, Washington is preparing to announce the formation of a “Peace Council,” an international framework that includes Arab and European countries, in addition to international financial institutions, with the aim of providing political and financial cover for the next phase. The US administration aspires for this council to be a platform for fundraising, coordinating reconstruction efforts, and perhaps later using it as a model for addressing other conflicts around the world.

In addition to the Peace Council, the United States is working to establish a more involved interim executive committee in daily details, comprising prominent political and diplomatic figures, and serving as a link with a technocratic Palestinian committee responsible for managing civil affairs in Gaza. This committee, whose formation efforts are led by Egypt, consists of non-factional figures, in an attempt to overcome Palestinian division and reassure Israel at the same time. Despite the Palestinian Authority's pressure for direct participation, Israel insists on excluding any official representation for it, content with the presence of figures with previous administrative backgrounds.

As for the security aspect, the idea of an “international stabilization force” still faces significant obstacles. The countries nominated to participate are hesitant to send forces to an unstable environment, despite Washington's attempts to reassure them that the mandate will be limited and will not include direct confrontation with Hamas. This hesitation raises questions about the international community's ability to fill the security vacuum that will be left by the gradual Israeli withdrawal.

The reconstruction file, in turn, is no less complex. The model projects being discussed, including the construction of residential complexes to house tens of thousands of Palestinians, clash with strict Israeli restrictions on the entry of materials classified as “dual-use.” The United Nations warns that the continuation of these restrictions will make any talk of real reconstruction closer to an illusion, given the difficulty of introducing the simplest humanitarian necessities, let alone heavy building materials.

In the background of all this, the file of the last Israeli captive's remains remains strongly present. The search operations for Gvili's remains were affected by military strikes and the killing of field commanders who were overseeing this file. Despite the recent resumption of efforts, the delay has become a factor of internal political pressure on Netanyahu, who links the opening of the Rafah crossing and the completion of some commitments to the return of the body.

The American move to separate the start of reconstruction from disarmament reflects a belated realization of the limits of power in imposing comprehensive solutions all at once. Washington is betting on “managing the conflict” instead of resolving it, believing that improving living conditions in Gaza may create new dynamics that weaken the armed incubator. However, this bet is fraught with risks, as it may be interpreted by Israel as a free concession, and by Palestinians as an alternative to a real political solution, threatening to turn reconstruction into a temporary palliative at best.

Experts believe that Netanyahu's insistence on linking every step to the weapons and hostage file focuses on the internal security angle, but it also reveals a deeper dilemma: the absence of an integrated Israeli vision for the day after in Gaza. The refusal to involve the Palestinian Authority, and the hesitation regarding an international force, leave a vacuum that cannot be filled by security solutions alone. In this vacuum, Washington is trying to play a balancing role, but it clashes with the reality that any sustainable stability will remain hostage to a postponed political process. 

The biggest challenge remains the ability of this new structure to withstand field violations and political reservations that continue to hinder the path to lasting peace.

The northern Gaza Strip is a center of military weight and ongoing conflict, having witnessed repeated ground and air operations over the past months.

The reduction in the number of employees today is a final warning bell to the international community, confirming that the lung through which Palestinian refugees breathe is suffering from systematic financial and political suffocation.

In the current Palestinian moment, the political crisis is no longer merely a direct result of the occupation or complex regional and international balances. Instead, it has become clear that it is a structural crisis within the Palestinian political system itself, related to its relationship with the people, the nature of party action, and the absence of accountability and participation mechanisms. The Palestinian people, despite all the historical catastrophes and continuous tragedies they have endured, remain united in their major national goals: freedom, independence, and the right of return. However, this popular cohesion is not reflected in the existing political structure, which suffers from deep stagnation and increasing detachment from the popular base.

“National unity” has long been treated as an overarching slogan used to overcome crises, but the fundamental problem lies in misdiagnosing the nature of the division. The real division in the Palestinian situation is not a popular division, but a partisan and organizational one. The Palestinian people, in the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem, and the diaspora, share national values and constants, while factions and parties suffer from disagreements related to power management, political and resistance action strategies, and decision-making mechanisms. The deliberate or unconscious confusion between popular division and partisan division has led to blaming society for a crisis it did not create, and to exempting political structures from accountability.

In this context, multi-partyism, in its current form, no longer performs its supposed democratic function. On the contrary, it has become a factor of weakening and disintegration, contributing to a series of political catastrophes for which the Palestinian people have paid heavy prices. When pluralism is separated from a unifying national reference, effective representative institutions, and genuine democratic mechanisms, it ceases to be healthy pluralism and transforms into a zero-sum conflict between organizations competing for influence and legitimacy, rather than for national programs and strategies.

The problem here is not with the principle of pluralism itself, but with its distorted context. The absence of a state under occupation, the suspension of elections, and the monopolization of political decision-making have caused parties to transform from tools of representation and organization into alternatives to the state, vying for resources, decisions, and legitimacy. Instead of factions expressing the social and political diversity within Palestinian society, they have become closed entities, rigid in their leaderships, tools, and strategies, unable to adapt to daily changes or respond to the renewed needs of citizens.

This paralyzed partisan reality has contributed to shifting the focus of the conflict from confronting the occupation to managing internal disagreements. Instead of directing popular energy towards building a cohesive liberation project, it has been drained in internal conflicts, in justifying failure, and in imposing political visions without offering real choices to the public. Here, the Nakba is no longer an exceptional event in Palestinian history, but a recurring path that is politically reproduced, in the absence of accountability and the lack of genuine popular participation.

From a political science perspective, the utility of pluralism is not measured by the number of parties, but by its ability to produce effective public policies, achieve stability, represent popular will, and renew legitimacies. When pluralism fails to perform these functions, it becomes a burden on society rather than a guarantee for it. This is what Palestinians are experiencing today, where multi-partyism, in its current form, has become an obstacle to rebuilding the political system, formulating a comprehensive national program, and unifying political decision-making in confronting the occupation.

In contrast, the Palestinian people remain the most stable element in the equation. Their strength lies not only in their steadfastness, but in their value unity and their inherent capacity for initiative and change. However, this strength has remained politically paralyzed, trapped between factions that do not truly represent them and do not involve them in decision-making. Hence, returning to the people, not as a slogan but as a political methodology, becomes the real gateway to any serious national change.

The current stage requires the people to move from the position of spectator to that of actor, by taking the initiative to build new political and civil frameworks, or by reasserting their role within existing frameworks, thereby creating genuine competition for their representation, and pushing traditional parties to change or be superseded. It also requires activating popular accountability tools, so that factions are evaluated based on their performance and the results of their policies, not on their history or rhetoric.

National political change cannot be achieved through slogans or general calls, but through a clear and comprehensive plan, starting with a re-evaluation of factions and parties and measuring the extent of their representation of the people, moving through strengthening the civil and youth space as the primary driver of any political transformation, and setting a long-term national agenda that includes political, economic, and social dimensions, away from narrow partisan conflicts.

Moreover, investing Palestinian time has become a strategic necessity. Every day that passes without building real internal strength is a wasted day. Investing in education, educating youth, building economic projects that enhance steadfastness, activating media campaigns, and using international law and international legitimacy to defend Palestinian rights are all cumulative tools that strengthen the national position and give any future strategy credibility and power.

The current historical stage may necessitate reducing the dominance of parties over national decision-making, without eliminating differences or confiscating pluralism, but by subjecting it to a general popular will and a comprehensive national program. What is required is functional unity in decision and strategy, not a formal unity between competing organizations. Factions must return to being tools in the service of the people, not centers of decision above them.

Ultimately, the Palestinian people remain the solid foundation for any successful national project, and recognizing that the division is partisan, not popular, is the first step towards real change. Without rebuilding the relationship between the people and the political system on the basis of participation, accountability, and initiative, multi-partyism, in its current form, will remain part of the crisis, not part of the solution, and political catastrophes will continue to recur, while only the people have the power to break this cycle and build a national future based on awareness, internal strength, and a comprehensive strategy.

Continuing to manage the Palestinian political scene with the same tools, the same mentalities, and the same multi-party structure is no longer a tactical error that can be tolerated, but has become a strategic danger to the entire national project. Parties that are not held accountable, do not renew their legitimacies, and do not involve the people in decision-making, transform from tools of struggle into centers of obstruction, regardless of their slogans or history.

The current moment cannot tolerate more political courtesies or the recycling of illusions. Time is working against the Palestinian people, not in favor of the factions, and every day wasted in internal conflicts or decisions detached from the popular will is a day added to the record of political catastrophes for which the occupation alone is no longer responsible. Insisting on the continuation of multi-partyism in its current form, without review or accountability, means tacitly accepting the continuation of division, the perpetuation of failure, and the reproduction of impotence under different guises.

What is needed is no longer a superficial reform within worn-out structures, but a re-establishment of the relationship between the people and politics from its roots. Either the national decision returns to the people as the sole source of legitimacy, or the political system continues to detach from them until it loses what little meaning and representation it has left. In this equation, there are no comfortable compromises, and no room to postpone confronting reality.

Palestinian history proves that the people have always been ahead of their leaders in awareness and sacrifice, and that catastrophes did not arise from a weak popular will, but from its poor political management. Hence, any national project that does not begin with holding factions accountable, reducing their dominance over decision-making, and freeing political action from their monopoly, is doomed to failure, no matter its intentions.

The choice today is clear and decisive: either a political system that reflects the will of a living and active people, or the continuation of a crisis-ridden partisan reality that produces only more internal erosion. Unless this battle is decided in favor of the people, talk of national unity or political salvation will remain mere rhetoric for consumption, while the Nakba advances silently and, this time, with local tools.

Washington can deprive its international rivals, such as China, of oil shipments they relied on, and on the other hand, it asserts control over Venezuela's financial resources.

In this photo taken on December 23, 2025, an oil tanker is anchored in Lake Maracaibo in Zulia State, Venezuela. (Xinhua)

The US military incursion into Venezuela, and the action taken against its president, Nicolas Maduro, as announced by the US administration, once again reveal Washington's reliance on unilateral force to impose outcomes beyond its borders.

This aggression also empties decades of American rhetoric, which presents the United States as the guardian of the rules of the international order, of its content. By bypassing the UN Security Council, Washington has once again acted in direct contradiction to the principles of international law.

Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter, a foundational principle of international law, explicitly prohibits the use or threat of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of any state. Consequently, the action taken against the leader of a sovereign state has unequivocally shown the world who the true violator of international law is.

History offers ample precedents. From Iraq and Libya to Panama and Grenada, the United States has repeatedly used or threatened to use force under dubious pretexts, often leaving behind long-term instability. Venezuela, long subjected to sanctions and political pressure, now joins that list, with diplomacy once again sidelined in favor of military coercion.

In this photo taken on August 4, 2022, the White House and a sign reading "STOP", in Washington D.C., United States. (Xinhua)

This aggression is all the more reprehensible because it occurred in Latin America. The region has a long history of US interventions, and the logic behind them has never truly disappeared.

As CNN noted in its analysis, "At the heart of this move lies Washington's broader ambitions to exert greater control over its immediate neighborhood, in what they called an updated version of the Monroe Doctrine."

This doctrine may no longer be explicitly declared, but its essence remains: the Western Hemisphere is still treated as Washington's exclusive sphere of influence.

Through its own repeated actions, Washington has emerged as one of the most dangerous threats to the international order it claims to defend.

For the rest of the world, speaking clearly and firmly in defense of sovereignty and multilateralism is no longer an optional choice. Rather, it has become essential to prevent a return to a world where power, not law, determines the fate of nations.

Washington – Said Arikat

In a remarkable development reflecting the scale of the shift in the relationship between the United States and Venezuela, US President Donald Trump presented a broad package of demands to the new Venezuelan President, Delcy Rodriguez, after she took the constitutional oath following the overthrow of former President Nicolas Maduro in a US military operation that sparked widespread international controversy.

According to US officials and converging media reports, Washington seeks to reshape the political, security, and economic landscape in Venezuela, considering the new phase a "historic opportunity" to end the influence of its adversaries in Latin America, primarily Russia, China, Iran, and Cuba.

Cutting International Alliances at the Forefront of Demands

Topping the list of American demands is a clear call to sever strategic, military, and security ties with Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Havana. Washington accuses these countries of using Venezuela as a platform to expand their political and intelligence influence in the Western Hemisphere, which it considers a direct threat to US national security.

Diplomatic sources indicate that the US administration is not content with merely reducing the level of relations but demands concrete steps, including ending military agreements, expelling foreign advisors, and halting any intelligence cooperation with these countries.

Security and Anti-Drug Efforts

On the security front, Washington is pressuring the new government to enhance cooperation in combating drug trafficking. The United States accuses previous governments in Caracas of complicity with international trafficking networks, an accusation officially denied by Venezuela.

US demands include restructuring security agencies, facilitating the work of American agencies, and exchanging intelligence information, a move observers see as an attempt to rebuild American influence within Venezuelan state institutions.

Oil and Economy: The Heart of the Equation

Economically, the oil sector is a key focus of the American vision. Washington demands redirecting Venezuelan oil exports away from countries classified as adversaries and opening the energy sector to American companies after years of sanctions and isolation.

In this regard, President Trump said on his Truth Social platform on Tuesday: "I am pleased to announce that the transitional authorities in Venezuela will deliver between 30 and 50 million barrels of high-quality, sanctioned oil to the United States of America. This oil will be sold at market price, and I, as President of the United States of America, will oversee the management of its proceeds to ensure they are used for the benefit of my people in Venezuela and the United States! I have asked Secretary of Energy Chris Wright to implement this plan immediately. The oil will be transported by storage tankers and delivered directly to discharge ports in the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

Initial talks have already begun on resuming oil exports to the United States, which could provide an economic lifeline for Caracas, but at the same time raises questions about the level of economic sovereignty in the coming phase.

Political Reforms and Elections

Politically, Washington calls for a "real democratic transition," including launching a process of constitutional reforms and organizing free elections. However, the US administration has not announced a clear timeline, reinforcing the impression that these demands are being used as a negotiating leverage rather than an immediate commitment.

Analysts believe that the easing of sanctions and the provision of financial aid will be conditional on the new government's response to these terms.

Caracas's Reaction: A Delicate Balance

For her part, President Rodriguez adopted a cautious tone. She condemned the US military intervention as a violation of the country's sovereignty, but at the same time called for dialogue and avoiding escalation, emphasizing that Venezuela needs stability and reconstruction.

This stance reflects a clear attempt to balance external pressures with maintaining a minimum level of internal legitimacy in a country suffering from a deep economic and social crisis.

Divergent International Positions

The US moves were met with sharp criticism from Russia, which described them as "neo-colonial threats," warning of serious repercussions for regional stability. China and Iran also expressed concern about the precedent of military intervention and the imposition of political dictates.

In contrast, some Latin American countries remained silent, while others expressed caution about escalating tensions in the region.

The American demands from the new Venezuelan government reflect a clear direction to reassert US influence in Latin America using a mix of military force and economic pressure. Washington is not content with regime change but seeks to re-engineer Venezuela's alliances and regional role. However, this approach carries real risks, as it could deepen internal divisions and provoke popular resistance against any government perceived as subservient to external dictates.

For President Rodriguez, the current phase represents an extremely difficult political test. Full compliance with US demands could provide her government with rapid economic support, but it could weaken her national legitimacy. Conversely, rejecting these conditions could expose the country to further pressure and isolation. Caracas's ability to maneuver between these two options will determine the shape of the Venezuelan state and its political future in the coming years.

Dr. Basem Abu Jrayy: The decision reflects a pre-prepared plan aimed at dismantling the structures supporting the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in the context of genocide..

Akram Attallah: The central goal of the step is to "kill life" and turn the Strip into an uninhabitable area, pushing towards a comprehensive displacement project..

Amjad Al-Shawa: The timing of the decision precedes the second phase, which portends further humanitarian complexity and a tendency to pressure residents and push them towards displacement..

Dr. Ahmed Awad: The closure of these institutions is to prevent the internationalization of the Palestinian issue, weaken Palestinian society, and cut off its communication with the outside world..

Sari Sammour: Israel may seek to monopolize the "management of suffering" in the Strip through institutions linked to it with international facades to achieve financial and security gains..

Dr. Tamara Haddad: The cessation of institutions' work negatively affects civil peace and turns aid into a pressure tool in the absence of "day after" arrangements..

Suleiman Basharat: Israel seeks to create a real humanitarian institutional vacuum in the Strip, which opens the door for it to propose "alternatives" that are completely subject to it... 

 The Gaza Strip is preparing to face serious repercussions due to the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions by the end of this month, which directly threatens the lives of residents and exacerbates crises of food, medicine, and basic services, in the context of escalating pressures leading to a displacement plan.

Officials, specialists, writers, and political analysts explain in separate conversations with "Al-Quds" that this decision comes within a sequential context of systematic targeting of local and international organizations, which began with attempts to undermine the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and then included human rights institutions and relief organizations, as part of a policy aimed at dismantling the humanitarian structure supporting the steadfastness of the population and controlling it to serve the occupation's agenda.

Officials, specialists, writers, and analysts point out that the step practically aims to turn the Strip into an uninhabitable area, as a political pressure tool to push Palestinians towards forced migration. 

They believe that the decision aims to cut off international oversight channels and the absence of documentation of Israeli violations, which isolates residents from the outside world and weakens civil society, in addition to creating an institutional vacuum, allowing it to fully control the management of suffering, and provide alternatives affiliated with the occupation, thereby strengthening control over the Strip.

Violation of the principles of international humanitarian law..

Dr. Basem Abu Jrayy, a researcher in development and human rights from the Gaza Strip, warns of the serious repercussions of the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions in the Strip by the end of this month, describing the decision as arbitrary and dangerous, and constituting a clear violation of the principles of international humanitarian law, particularly the principle of facilitating the work of neutral humanitarian organizations.

Abu Jrayy explains that this decision directly contradicts the obligations of the occupying power under the Geneva Conventions, which oblige it to ensure the unimpeded and good-faith access of humanitarian aid to civilian populations under occupation. 

Tools to restrict humanitarian work..

Abu Jrayy clarifies that the conditions imposed by the occupation, related to requesting extensive security information about workers in humanitarian organizations, are merely tools to restrict humanitarian work and undermine its independence, and a pretext to exclude a large number of organizations, including effective international organizations.

Abu Jrayy points out that the exclusion of this wide number of institutions will inevitably lead to a serious decline in access to basic services, foremost among them healthcare, water, food, and protection, at a time when the Gaza Strip is experiencing a catastrophic and unprecedented humanitarian situation.  

Abu Jrayy emphasizes that civilians, especially children, women, and the elderly, face increasing risks that threaten their lives and dignity in light of this accelerating deterioration.

Escalating systematic targeting..

Abu Jrayy explains that the decision comes within an escalating context of systematic targeting, which began with attempts to undermine the role of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), then expanded to include Palestinian human rights institutions that were subjected to organized smear and criminalization campaigns, reaching the point of imposing sanctions on them by the US Treasury, before extending today to dozens of humanitarian and relief organizations.

Abu Jrayy stresses that this sequence in targeting local and international organizations cannot be separated from each other, but rather reflects the existence of a pre-prepared plan aimed at dismantling the structures supporting the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in the context of ongoing genocide, emptying Palestinian land of any humanitarian or human rights protection, and isolating civilian populations and obliterating their cause.

Abu Jrayy affirms that the protection of humanitarian work is not a procedural or technical matter, but a legal and moral obligation that should not be subjected to political considerations or manipulated under any pretext.

Serious repercussions on the overall humanitarian situation..

Writer and political analyst Akram Attallah confirms that the cessation of humanitarian institutions' work in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month will have serious repercussions on the overall humanitarian and living situation, pointing out that the Strip has become almost entirely dependent on humanitarian work, in the absence of any service or economic infrastructure capable of meeting the needs of the population.

Attallah explains that Israel has succeeded, during the past period, in diverting the compass of dealing with the Gaza Strip from the essence of the conflict and its political and historical dimensions, to reducing the Strip to a purely "humanitarian case," for which no services are provided except through international institutions.

Attallah points out that the continuous tightening of restrictions on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), and the withdrawal of recognition from it, have led to a reduction in its role, making other international humanitarian institutions almost the sole provider of minimal services to the residents of the Strip.

Attallah notes that halting the work of these institutions practically means depriving Gaza of basic services, or keeping them at their lowest levels, as part of a policy aimed at maintaining the state of suffering and daily torture of residents within the Strip.

Killing life for the sake of displacement..

Attallah considers that this policy tightens the noose on citizens to push them to consider leaving Gaza, citing statements by US President Donald Trump in which he spoke about the readiness of a large part of the Strip's residents to leave if they had the opportunity.

Attallah believes that the central goal of this step is to "kill life" in the Gaza Strip, and turn it into an uninhabitable area, which pushes residents to search for other more livable places, not within the Strip nor even in areas that Israel describes as "safe," but completely outside Gaza, in the context of a comprehensive displacement project.

Attallah points to the existence of more than one scenario related to halting the work of these institutions, but all of them point in one direction, which is the continued tightening of restrictions on parts of the Strip, especially what is known as western Gaza, by preventing humanitarian aid, stopping reconstruction, and disrupting any means of life, to force residents to leave. 

Attallah notes that talking about temporary solutions, such as caravans or transitional residential areas, does not mean providing a stable humanitarian environment, but rather constitutes a transitional phase until residents are pushed to search for an alternative homeland outside the Gaza Strip.

Preventing the entry of international institutions' aid..

Amjad Al-Shawa, head of the Palestinian NGO Network in the Gaza Strip, warns of serious consequences resulting from the Israeli decision to halt the work of international humanitarian institutions in the Strip by the end of this month, stressing that this decision comes in the context of systematic targeting of the already deteriorating humanitarian situation, and represents a dangerous escalation that directly threatens the lives of residents.

Al-Shawa explains that one of the most dangerous indicators of this decision is the Israeli occupation forces' prevention of the entry of humanitarian aid belonging to international institutions, pointing out that thousands of trucks loaded with aid are still prevented from reaching the Gaza Strip, including essential medicines and medical supplies, shelter supplies, water sector needs, in addition to supplies for dealing with escalating malnutrition cases, especially among children and patients.

Al-Shawa affirms that humanitarian institutions operating in the Strip play a pivotal role that is not limited to hospitals, but also includes operating a large number of malnutrition treatment centers, and working in vital sectors such as water and sanitation, in addition to shelter.

Al-Shawa points out that the occupation began, as of Tuesday, preventing the arrival of international staff working in these institutions, whether administrative, technical, or medical, which practically means paralyzing the ability of these organizations to respond to increasing humanitarian needs, at a time when the Strip is witnessing a near-complete collapse in various service sectors.

Al-Shawa notes that this decision coincides with the Israeli occupation's ban on the work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), and preventing the entry of its aid into the Gaza Strip, explaining that about 6,000 trucks belonging to the agency are not allowed to reach the Strip, despite the widespread reliance of residents on its basic services.

Al-Shawa clarifies that the impact of this decision will be extremely serious in light of a tragic humanitarian reality, where about one and a half million citizens have lost their homes, and nearly 900,000 of them live in dilapidated tents that do not meet the minimum requirements for a decent life, and do not represent a real or sustainable solution to the ongoing displacement crisis.

Silencing the voice of international institutions..

Al-Shawa affirms that the occupation aims through this decision to achieve several goals, most notably the complete isolation of the Gaza Strip, and silencing the voice of international institutions that have worked for decades in the Strip and the Palestinian territories, in addition to disrupting the provision of basic services, especially in the health sector, where these institutions contribute to providing more than a third of health services through civilian hospitals and medical centers.

Al-Shawa stresses that the presence of international staff and teams constitutes a form of international oversight over what is happening in the Gaza Strip, pointing out that among the goals of the Israeli occupation in disrupting the work of these institutions is to silence their voice, and prevent the issuance of reports that document Israeli violations and reveal the deterioration of humanitarian conditions in the Strip.

Timing of the decision with the start of the second phase..

Al-Shawa stresses that halting the work of these organizations will deepen the humanitarian crisis at all levels, and poses a real threat to the lives of residents, noting that the timing of the decision precedes the start of the second phase of the ceasefire, which portends further humanitarian complexity and escalation, and reflects a tendency to increase pressure on residents and push them towards displacement plans.

Al-Shawa affirms that this decision constitutes a blatant violation of the principles of humanitarian action and international humanitarian law, and of the ceasefire agreement and the humanitarian protocol, as well as the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice which stressed the need to ensure the access of aid through humanitarian institutions and "UNRWA."

Al-Shawa points to ongoing efforts and pressures to find solutions that ensure the continued work of these institutions, and prevent the expansion of the decision's repercussions on Gaza and the West Bank, including Jerusalem.

Closing the Palestinians' window to the outside world..

Writer and political analyst Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad warns of the serious repercussions of the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month, stressing that the direct impact of this decision is a comprehensive and severe shortage of aid in all its forms, foremost among them medical and humanitarian aid, in addition to closing the "only remaining window" that connects Palestinians to the outside world.

Awad explains that halting the work of these institutions will lead to a widespread deterioration in societal conditions, rising unemployment rates, and the dismissal of large numbers of workers, employees, and beneficiaries of these organizations' programs, which will negatively affect the overall economic and social life in the Gaza Strip. 

Awad considers that this closure practically means a shortage of everything, from food, medicine, services, and training and rehabilitation opportunities, which leads to the systematic impoverishment of the Palestinian people.

Cutting off the lifeline of international oversight..

Awad points out that the closure of international and UN institutions is not limited to stopping the flow of aid, but also means cutting off the lifeline of international oversight, as these institutions play a fundamental role in documenting the damages resulting from the siege, military operations, overcrowding, and the spread of diseases, and submit reliable reports to the international community.

Awad notes that the absence of these reports will deprive the world of knowing the true extent of the violations suffered by Palestinians, which is what Israel seeks by removing any international presence witnessing what is happening in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Awad clarifies that among the main goals of closing these institutions are preventing the internationalization of the Palestinian issue, weakening civil society, and cutting off communication between Palestinians and the outside world, in addition to bypassing international bodies and organizations, foremost among them the United Nations.

Awad considers that targeting UNRWA constituted the beginning of this path, which amounts to a direct assault on the United Nations system, and on European civil society, and even an insult to the European Union, given that most of these institutions have European roots and enjoy widespread official and popular support in Europe.

Awad affirms that Israel seeks through this policy to monopolize the narrative and media discourse, and prevent any independent and credible party from conveying what is happening on the ground, which allows it to control news and information, and monopolize the Palestinian people without international oversight or accountability.

Awad points to the possibility of an attempt by the European Union and humanitarian and social forces in Europe to exert political pressure to reopen the field for the work of these institutions, considering that this path is possible but not guaranteed.

Awad warns of a more severe scenario in which Israel may continue to prevent these institutions, and perhaps expand the targeting to include other organizations.

Awad points to the possibility of some institutions submitting to Israeli conditions and oversight in exchange for being allowed to work, even if that involves a great deal of concession.

Awad affirms that the worst-case scenario is the direct harm to Palestinians from the absence of these institutions, which not only provide aid but also constitute international communication channels, training and employment sources, and oversight and protection tools, warning that the price of their absence will be high at both the humanitarian and political levels.

Another form of "slow killing"..

Writer and political analyst Sari Sammour believes that halting the work of humanitarian institutions in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month will lead to an unprecedented exacerbation of the suffering of residents, stressing that the Strip needs an increase in the number of operating institutions and enhanced intervention, not the disruption of what remains of them or the partial restriction of their work, in light of an extremely harsh humanitarian reality.

Sammour explains that the humanitarian impact of this decision will be direct and profound, as it will increase the levels of poverty, destitution, and misery already experienced by citizens, and will affect the lives of displaced and non-displaced persons in various areas of the Strip, stressing that all residents of the Gaza Strip need the services and aid of these institutions, which makes halting them a step with dire consequences at both the humanitarian and service levels.

Sammour considers that Israel clearly seeks to increase the suffering of the residents of the Gaza Strip, and to move from direct military warfare to another form of "slow killing," through starvation and systematic tightening of restrictions on people, as part of a continuous policy of collective punishment.

Sammour believes that this policy aims to push Palestinians to despair and search for alternatives outside Gaza, in line with attempts to displace the Strip that are managed through frameworks or entities bearing fictitious or borrowed names.

Sammour affirms that this step reflects Israel's disregard for international law and humanitarian treaties and protocols, based on its feeling of impunity, pointing out that Israel has committed widespread crimes including killing tens of thousands, injuring hundreds of thousands, and displacing about two million Palestinians, without facing actual accountability, which encourages it to proceed with disrupting the work of humanitarian institutions without fear of consequences.

Israeli attempt to monopolize "management of suffering"..

Sammour points out that some institutions may resort to adapting to the decision by making concessions to Israel in exchange for continuing to work, warning of the danger of this path, which may forcibly turn these institutions into tools to serve the security objectives of the occupation, by leaking sensitive data or information about beneficiaries, or exploiting this data in monitoring or recruitment operations.

Sammour rules out serious American pressure to freeze the decision, considering it unlikely at the present stage, although he does not rule out sudden developments.

Sammour affirms that action from within Israel through the remaining legal system or by lawyers and human rights activists remains a scenario with limited impact, given the dominance of extremist currents.

Sammour warns that the most likely outcome is the closure of humanitarian institutions and increased suffering for Gazans, with the possibility of Israel seeking to monopolize the "management of suffering" through institutions linked to it with international facades, thereby achieving financial and security gains at the expense of the urgent humanitarian needs of the Strip's residents.

Escalating rates of malnutrition and food insecurity..

Writer and political researcher Dr. Tamara Haddad warns that the cessation of humanitarian institutions' work inside the Gaza Strip will lead to an unprecedented deepening of the state of starvation, in light of the collapse of basic services and the absence of the relief dimension, which constitutes the main pillar for providing food, medicine, and humanitarian supplies to the population, stressing that the expected repercussions will be extremely serious humanitarian, social, and health consequences.

Haddad explains that the cessation of humanitarian organizations' work will lead to an exacerbation of the severe crisis in the Gaza Strip, with escalating rates of malnutrition and food insecurity, as a result of the halt in the entry and distribution of food, medicine, and essential supplies, pointing out that the health situation has become extremely fragile, in the absence of the components of normal healthcare, which directly affects patients and the most vulnerable groups.

Haddad clarifies that the most affected segments by this deterioration are children, women, the elderly, and the sick, who already suffer from a severe shortage of health and nutritional services, noting that the exacerbation of the crisis coincides with winter, when disease rates increase, which portends widespread health complications, in addition to the serious psychological effects resulting from the decline in services, including frustration, social pressure, family disintegration, and deepening the feeling of a lack of horizon and future.

Enhancing the risks of forced displacement..

Haddad points out that the state of frustration is exacerbated by the absence of any indicators of reconstruction or regular entry of aid, in addition to the Israeli occupation linking the opening of crossings to political and security conditions, which reinforces in the minds of citizens the idea that any potential opening of crossings may be linked to pushing them out of the Gaza Strip, in a context that enhances the risks of forced or involuntary displacement.

Haddad considers that the continued cessation of humanitarian work, in parallel with the opening of the Rafah crossing for entry and exit without guaranteeing the flow of aid, will entrench the idea of displacement in the citizen's mind, and create a negative humanitarian reality that pressures residents to remain in a state of permanent waiting for aid.

Encouraging monopoly and raising prices..

Haddad points out that the scarcity of aid, if it enters, may open the door for its exploitation by armed groups or Israeli-backed entities, which infiltrate securely through non-neutral humanitarian facades, leading to control over the distribution process.

Haddad affirms that the halt in the entry of aid through UN institutions will encourage its monopolization and price increases, and prevent its fair distribution, which may negatively affect civil peace, and turn aid into a tool of pressure and influence in the absence of clear arrangements for the "day after" and the failure of any official body capable of managing the scene.

Haddad considers that the worst-case scenario is the complete withdrawal of international organizations and the dismantling of the relief and humanitarian recovery system, which means exacerbating famine, spreading diseases, and undermining the ability of residents to withstand.

Haddad believes that the best-case scenario lies in a pressing international intervention, led by the United Nations and major powers, to restore banned humanitarian institutions and ensure the entry of aid without restrictions or conditions, with the participation of neutral international and Arab organizations, thereby ensuring fair and transparent distribution that protects Palestinian society from complete collapse.

A systematic process to empty the institutional concept..

Writer and political analyst Suleiman Basharat believes that what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip amounts to a systematic process to empty the institutional concept, at both local and international levels, within a comprehensive vision to reshape the humanitarian and political reality in the Strip to serve Israeli long-term goals.

Basharat explains that this trend has been embodied, over the past two years, in the widespread targeting of local institutions in the Gaza Strip, then moved to a more dangerous level by disrupting the work of international institutions, foremost among them the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), reaching what remains of humanitarian institutions that can form a relief safety net for the population.

Basharat considers that these steps are not to be read as separate measures, but as an integrated path aimed at emptying Gaza of any independent institutional presence.

Basharat points out that the first fundamental result of this path is the creation of a real humanitarian institutional vacuum within the Strip, which opens the door for Israel to propose "alternatives" that are completely subject to its policies and agenda. 

Basharat refers to previous experiences, such as the model of the "Gaza Humanitarian" institution that was promoted with American support and Israeli coordination, as a preliminary attempt to create alternative frameworks for the traditional international humanitarian system, but within a ceiling that serves Israeli interests.

Tightening comprehensive control over the Strip..

Basharat believes that the second goal of this policy is to tighten comprehensive control over the Gaza Strip, so that Israel becomes the primary reference in everything related to the future of the Strip, starting from the humanitarian file, through the economic and social reality, to the security and political dimensions.

Basharat considers that this clearly reflects that any talk of an actual Israeli withdrawal from Gaza is not consistent with the Israeli vision, which seeks to manage the Strip directly or indirectly.

Basharat clarifies that Israel is working, in this context, to create a "dependent shadow" for itself within Gaza, whether through the humanitarian, security, military, or even political gateway, which allows it to remotely control all aspects of life in the absence of direct military presence.

Basharat cites the example of the crossings, which Israel controls completely, where it controls their opening and closing, and what enters or is prevented from entering the Strip, as a practical example of this pattern of control.

Basharat believes that among the goals of this policy is to empty the international dimension of the Gaza issue, and turn it into a bilateral Palestinian-Israeli conflict file, which justifies, from the Israeli point of view, excluding international intervention, and imposing policies that stem from security pretexts that may later develop into clear political goals.

Re-engineering the humanitarian and institutional structure..

Basharat warns of the possibility of the Strip entering a dangerous stage in the process of re-engineering its humanitarian and institutional structure, to become a structure completely subordinate to the Israeli vision, whether in terms of management, decision-making, or priorities.

Basharat suggests that Israel may allow a limited presence of some international institutions, but within a strict ceiling that ensures its complete control and keeps Gaza in a state of permanent humanitarian depletion, making it in continuous need of aid. 

Basharat did not rule out a scenario of effective international or regional action that restores the role of humanitarian institutions, but it is unlikely at the present stage, given the absolute American support for Israel, and the complexity of the humanitarian crisis that requires comprehensive international intervention beyond merely the presence of a number of relief institutions.

Dr. Basem Abu Jrayy: The decision reflects a pre-prepared plan aimed at dismantling the structures supporting the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in the context of genocide..

Akram Attallah: The central goal of the step is to "kill life" and turn the Strip into an uninhabitable area, pushing towards a comprehensive displacement project..

Amjad Al-Shawa: The timing of the decision precedes the second phase, which portends further humanitarian complexity and a tendency to pressure residents and push them towards displacement..

Dr. Ahmed Awad: The closure of these institutions is to prevent the internationalization of the Palestinian issue, weaken Palestinian society, and cut off its communication with the outside world..

Sari Sammour: Israel may seek to monopolize the "management of suffering" in the Strip through institutions linked to it with international facades to achieve financial and security gains..

Dr. Tamara Haddad: The cessation of institutions' work negatively affects civil peace and turns aid into a pressure tool in the absence of "day after" arrangements..

Suleiman Basharat: Israel seeks to create a real humanitarian institutional vacuum in the Strip, which opens the door for it to propose "alternatives" that are completely subject to it... 

Ramallah - Exclusive to "Al-Quds" - The Gaza Strip is preparing to face serious repercussions due to the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions by the end of this month, which directly threatens the lives of residents and exacerbates crises of food, medicine, and basic services, in the context of escalating pressures leading to a displacement plan.

Officials, specialists, writers, and political analysts explain in separate conversations with "Al-Quds" that this decision comes within a sequential context of systematic targeting of local and international organizations, which began with attempts to undermine the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and then included human rights institutions and relief organizations, as part of a policy aimed at dismantling the humanitarian structure supporting the steadfastness of the population and controlling it to serve the occupation's agenda.

Officials, specialists, writers, and analysts point out that the step practically aims to turn the Strip into an uninhabitable area, as a political pressure tool to push Palestinians towards forced migration. 

They believe that the decision aims to cut off international oversight channels and the absence of documentation of Israeli violations, which isolates residents from the outside world and weakens civil society, in addition to creating an institutional vacuum, allowing it to fully control the management of suffering, and provide alternatives affiliated with the occupation, thereby strengthening control over the Strip.

Violation of the principles of international humanitarian law..

Dr. Basem Abu Jrayy, a researcher in development and human rights from the Gaza Strip, warns of the serious repercussions of the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions in the Strip by the end of this month, describing the decision as arbitrary and dangerous, and constituting a clear violation of the principles of international humanitarian law, particularly the principle of facilitating the work of neutral humanitarian organizations.

Abu Jrayy explains that this decision directly contradicts the obligations of the occupying power under the Geneva Conventions, which oblige it to ensure the unimpeded and good-faith access of humanitarian aid to civilian populations under occupation. 

Tools to restrict humanitarian work..

Abu Jrayy clarifies that the conditions imposed by the occupation, related to requesting extensive security information about workers in humanitarian organizations, are merely tools to restrict humanitarian work and undermine its independence, and a pretext to exclude a large number of organizations, including effective international organizations.

Abu Jrayy points out that the exclusion of this wide number of institutions will inevitably lead to a serious decline in access to basic services, foremost among them healthcare, water, food, and protection, at a time when the Gaza Strip is experiencing a catastrophic and unprecedented humanitarian situation.  

Abu Jrayy emphasizes that civilians, especially children, women, and the elderly, face increasing risks that threaten their lives and dignity in light of this accelerating deterioration.

Escalating systematic targeting..

Abu Jrayy explains that the decision comes within an escalating context of systematic targeting, which began with attempts to undermine the role of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), then expanded to include Palestinian human rights institutions that were subjected to organized smear and criminalization campaigns, reaching the point of imposing sanctions on them by the US Treasury, before extending today to dozens of humanitarian and relief organizations.

Abu Jrayy stresses that this sequence in targeting local and international organizations cannot be separated from each other, but rather reflects the existence of a pre-prepared plan aimed at dismantling the structures supporting the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in the context of ongoing genocide, emptying Palestinian land of any humanitarian or human rights protection, and isolating civilian populations and obliterating their cause.

Abu Jrayy affirms that the protection of humanitarian work is not a procedural or technical matter, but a legal and moral obligation that should not be subjected to political considerations or manipulated under any pretext.

Serious repercussions on the overall humanitarian situation..

Writer and political analyst Akram Attallah confirms that the cessation of humanitarian institutions' work in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month will have serious repercussions on the overall humanitarian and living situation, pointing out that the Strip has become almost entirely dependent on humanitarian work, in the absence of any service or economic infrastructure capable of meeting the needs of the population.

Attallah explains that Israel has succeeded, during the past period, in diverting the compass of dealing with the Gaza Strip from the essence of the conflict and its political and historical dimensions, to reducing the Strip to a purely "humanitarian case," for which no services are provided except through international institutions.

Attallah points out that the continuous tightening of restrictions on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), and the withdrawal of recognition from it, have led to a reduction in its role, making other international humanitarian institutions almost the sole provider of minimal services to the residents of the Strip.

Attallah notes that halting the work of these institutions practically means depriving Gaza of basic services, or keeping them at their lowest levels, as part of a policy aimed at maintaining the state of suffering and daily torture of residents within the Strip.

Killing life for the sake of displacement..

Attallah considers that this policy tightens the noose on citizens to push them to consider leaving Gaza, citing statements by US President Donald Trump in which he spoke about the readiness of a large part of the Strip's residents to leave if they had the opportunity.

Attallah believes that the central goal of this step is to "kill life" in the Gaza Strip, and turn it into an uninhabitable area, which pushes residents to search for other more livable places, not within the Strip nor even in areas that Israel describes as "safe," but completely outside Gaza, in the context of a comprehensive displacement project.

Attallah points to the existence of more than one scenario related to halting the work of these institutions, but all of them point in one direction, which is the continued tightening of restrictions on parts of the Strip, especially what is known as western Gaza, by preventing humanitarian aid, stopping reconstruction, and disrupting any means of life, to force residents to leave. 

Attallah notes that talking about temporary solutions, such as caravans or transitional residential areas, does not mean providing a stable humanitarian environment, but rather constitutes a transitional phase until residents are pushed to search for an alternative homeland outside the Gaza Strip.

Preventing the entry of international institutions' aid..

Amjad Al-Shawa, head of the Palestinian NGO Network in the Gaza Strip, warns of serious consequences resulting from the Israeli decision to halt the work of international humanitarian institutions in the Strip by the end of this month, stressing that this decision comes in the context of systematic targeting of the already deteriorating humanitarian situation, and represents a dangerous escalation that directly threatens the lives of residents.

Al-Shawa explains that one of the most dangerous indicators of this decision is the Israeli occupation forces' prevention of the entry of humanitarian aid belonging to international institutions, pointing out that thousands of trucks loaded with aid are still prevented from reaching the Gaza Strip, including essential medicines and medical supplies, shelter supplies, water sector needs, in addition to supplies for dealing with escalating malnutrition cases, especially among children and patients.

Al-Shawa affirms that humanitarian institutions operating in the Strip play a pivotal role that is not limited to hospitals, but also includes operating a large number of malnutrition treatment centers, and working in vital sectors such as water and sanitation, in addition to shelter.

Al-Shawa points out that the occupation began, as of Tuesday, preventing the arrival of international staff working in these institutions, whether administrative, technical, or medical, which practically means paralyzing the ability of these organizations to respond to increasing humanitarian needs, at a time when the Strip is witnessing a near-complete collapse in various service sectors.

Al-Shawa notes that this decision coincides with the Israeli occupation's ban on the work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), and preventing the entry of its aid into the Gaza Strip, explaining that about 6,000 trucks belonging to the agency are not allowed to reach the Strip, despite the widespread reliance of residents on its basic services.

Al-Shawa clarifies that the impact of this decision will be extremely serious in light of a tragic humanitarian reality, where about one and a half million citizens have lost their homes, and nearly 900,000 of them live in dilapidated tents that do not meet the minimum requirements for a decent life, and do not represent a real or sustainable solution to the ongoing displacement crisis.

Silencing the voice of international institutions..

Al-Shawa affirms that the occupation aims through this decision to achieve several goals, most notably the complete isolation of the Gaza Strip, and silencing the voice of international institutions that have worked for decades in the Strip and the Palestinian territories, in addition to disrupting the provision of basic services, especially in the health sector, where these institutions contribute to providing more than a third of health services through civilian hospitals and medical centers.

Al-Shawa stresses that the presence of international staff and teams constitutes a form of international oversight over what is happening in the Gaza Strip, pointing out that among the goals of the Israeli occupation in disrupting the work of these institutions is to silence their voice, and prevent the issuance of reports that document Israeli violations and reveal the deterioration of humanitarian conditions in the Strip.

Timing of the decision with the start of the second phase..

Al-Shawa stresses that halting the work of these organizations will deepen the humanitarian crisis at all levels, and poses a real threat to the lives of residents, noting that the timing of the decision precedes the start of the second phase of the ceasefire, which portends further humanitarian complexity and escalation, and reflects a tendency to increase pressure on residents and push them towards displacement plans.

Al-Shawa affirms that this decision constitutes a blatant violation of the principles of humanitarian action and international humanitarian law, and of the ceasefire agreement and the humanitarian protocol, as well as the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice which stressed the need to ensure the access of aid through humanitarian institutions and "UNRWA."

Al-Shawa points to ongoing efforts and pressures to find solutions that ensure the continued work of these institutions, and prevent the expansion of the decision's repercussions on Gaza and the West Bank, including Jerusalem.

Closing the Palestinians' window to the outside world..

Writer and political analyst Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad warns of the serious repercussions of the Israeli occupation's decision to halt the work of humanitarian institutions in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month, stressing that the direct impact of this decision is a comprehensive and severe shortage of aid in all its forms, foremost among them medical and humanitarian aid, in addition to closing the "only remaining window" that connects Palestinians to the outside world.

Awad explains that halting the work of these institutions will lead to a widespread deterioration in societal conditions, rising unemployment rates, and the dismissal of large numbers of workers, employees, and beneficiaries of these organizations' programs, which will negatively affect the overall economic and social life in the Gaza Strip. 

Awad considers that this closure practically means a shortage of everything, from food, medicine, services, and training and rehabilitation opportunities, which leads to the systematic impoverishment of the Palestinian people.

Cutting off the lifeline of international oversight..

Awad points out that the closure of international and UN institutions is not limited to stopping the flow of aid, but also means cutting off the lifeline of international oversight, as these institutions play a fundamental role in documenting the damages resulting from the siege, military operations, overcrowding, and the spread of diseases, and submit reliable reports to the international community.

Awad notes that the absence of these reports will deprive the world of knowing the true extent of the violations suffered by Palestinians, which is what Israel seeks by removing any international presence witnessing what is happening in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Awad clarifies that among the main goals of closing these institutions are preventing the internationalization of the Palestinian issue, weakening civil society, and cutting off communication between Palestinians and the outside world, in addition to bypassing international bodies and organizations, foremost among them the United Nations.

Awad considers that targeting UNRWA constituted the beginning of this path, which amounts to a direct assault on the United Nations system, and on European civil society, and even an insult to the European Union, given that most of these institutions have European roots and enjoy widespread official and popular support in Europe.

Awad affirms that Israel seeks through this policy to monopolize the narrative and media discourse, and prevent any independent and credible party from conveying what is happening on the ground, which allows it to control news and information, and monopolize the Palestinian people without international oversight or accountability.

Awad points to the possibility of an attempt by the European Union and humanitarian and social forces in Europe to exert political pressure to reopen the field for the work of these institutions, considering that this path is possible but not guaranteed.

Awad warns of a more severe scenario in which Israel may continue to prevent these institutions, and perhaps expand the targeting to include other organizations.

Awad points to the possibility of some institutions submitting to Israeli conditions and oversight in exchange for being allowed to work, even if that involves a great deal of concession.

Awad affirms that the worst-case scenario is the direct harm to Palestinians from the absence of these institutions, which not only provide aid but also constitute international communication channels, training and employment sources, and oversight and protection tools, warning that the price of their absence will be high at both the humanitarian and political levels.

Another form of "slow killing"..

Writer and political analyst Sari Sammour believes that halting the work of humanitarian institutions in the Gaza Strip by the end of this month will lead to an unprecedented exacerbation of the suffering of residents, stressing that the Strip needs an increase in the number of operating institutions and enhanced intervention, not the disruption of what remains of them or the partial restriction of their work, in light of an extremely harsh humanitarian reality.

Sammour explains that the humanitarian impact of this decision will be direct and profound, as it will increase the levels of poverty, destitution, and misery already experienced by citizens, and will affect the lives of displaced and non-displaced persons in various areas of the Strip, stressing that all residents of the Gaza Strip need the services and aid of these institutions, which makes halting them a step with dire consequences at both the humanitarian and service levels.

Sammour considers that Israel clearly seeks to increase the suffering of the residents of the Gaza Strip, and to move from direct military warfare to another form of "slow killing," through starvation and systematic tightening of restrictions on people, as part of a continuous policy of collective punishment.

Sammour believes that this policy aims to push Palestinians to despair and search for alternatives outside Gaza, in line with attempts to displace the Strip that are managed through frameworks or entities bearing fictitious or borrowed names.

Sammour affirms that this step reflects Israel's disregard for international law and humanitarian treaties and protocols, based on its feeling of impunity, pointing out that Israel has committed widespread crimes including killing tens of thousands, injuring hundreds of thousands, and displacing about two million Palestinians, without facing actual accountability, which encourages it to proceed with disrupting the work of humanitarian institutions without fear of consequences.

Israeli attempt to monopolize "management of suffering"..

Sammour points out that some institutions may resort to adapting to the decision by making concessions to Israel in exchange for continuing to work, warning of the danger of this path, which may forcibly turn these institutions into tools to serve the security objectives of the occupation, by leaking sensitive data or information about beneficiaries, or exploiting this data in monitoring or recruitment operations.

Sammour rules out serious American pressure to freeze the decision, considering it unlikely at the present stage, although he does not rule out sudden developments.

Sammour affirms that action from within Israel through the remaining legal system or by lawyers and human rights activists remains a scenario with limited impact, given the dominance of extremist currents.

Sammour warns that the most likely outcome is the closure of humanitarian institutions and increased suffering for Gazans, with the possibility of Israel seeking to monopolize the "management of suffering" through institutions linked to it with international facades, thereby achieving financial and security gains at the expense of the urgent humanitarian needs of the Strip's residents.

Escalating rates of malnutrition and food insecurity..

Writer and political researcher Dr. Tamara Haddad warns that the cessation of humanitarian institutions' work inside the Gaza Strip will lead to an unprecedented deepening of the state of starvation, in light of the collapse of basic services and the absence of the relief dimension, which constitutes the main pillar for providing food, medicine, and humanitarian supplies to the population, stressing that the expected repercussions will be extremely serious humanitarian, social, and health consequences.

Haddad explains that the cessation of humanitarian organizations' work will lead to an exacerbation of the severe crisis in the Gaza Strip, with escalating rates of malnutrition and food insecurity, as a result of the halt in the entry and distribution of food, medicine, and essential supplies, pointing out that the health situation has become extremely fragile, in the absence of the components of normal healthcare, which directly affects patients and the most vulnerable groups.

Haddad clarifies that the most affected segments by this deterioration are children, women, the elderly, and the sick, who already suffer from a severe shortage of health and nutritional services, noting that the exacerbation of the crisis coincides with winter, when disease rates increase, which portends widespread health complications, in addition to the serious psychological effects resulting from the decline in services, including frustration, social pressure, family disintegration, and deepening the feeling of a lack of horizon and future.

Enhancing the risks of forced displacement..

Haddad points out that the state of frustration is exacerbated by the absence of any indicators of reconstruction or regular entry of aid, in addition to the Israeli occupation linking the opening of crossings to political and security conditions, which reinforces in the minds of citizens the idea that any potential opening of crossings may be linked to pushing them out of the Gaza Strip, in a context that enhances the risks of forced or involuntary displacement.

Haddad considers that the continued cessation of humanitarian work, in parallel with the opening of the Rafah crossing for entry and exit without guaranteeing the flow of aid, will entrench the idea of displacement in the citizen's mind, and create a negative humanitarian reality that pressures residents to remain in a state of permanent waiting for aid.

Encouraging monopoly and raising prices..

Haddad points out that the scarcity of aid, if it enters, may open the door for its exploitation by armed groups or Israeli-backed entities, which infiltrate securely through non-neutral humanitarian facades, leading to control over the distribution process.

Haddad affirms that the halt in the entry of aid through UN institutions will encourage its monopolization and price increases, and prevent its fair distribution, which may negatively affect civil peace, and turn aid into a tool of pressure and influence in the absence of clear arrangements for the "day after" and the failure of any official body capable of managing the scene.

Haddad considers that the worst-case scenario is the complete withdrawal of international organizations and the dismantling of the relief and humanitarian recovery system, which means exacerbating famine, spreading diseases, and undermining the ability of residents to withstand.

Haddad believes that the best-case scenario lies in a pressing international intervention, led by the United Nations and major powers, to restore banned humanitarian institutions and ensure the entry of aid without restrictions or conditions, with the participation of neutral international and Arab organizations, thereby ensuring fair and transparent distribution that protects Palestinian society from complete collapse.

A systematic process to empty the institutional concept..

Writer and political analyst Suleiman Basharat believes that what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip amounts to a systematic process to empty the institutional concept, at both local and international levels, within a comprehensive vision to reshape the humanitarian and political reality in the Strip to serve Israeli long-term goals.

Basharat explains that this trend has been embodied, over the past two years, in the widespread targeting of local institutions in the Gaza Strip, then moved to a more dangerous level by disrupting the work of international institutions, foremost among them the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), reaching what remains of humanitarian institutions that can form a relief safety net for the population.

Basharat considers that these steps are not to be read as separate measures, but as an integrated path aimed at emptying Gaza of any independent institutional presence.

Basharat points out that the first fundamental result of this path is the creation of a real humanitarian institutional vacuum within the Strip, which opens the door for Israel to propose "alternatives" that are completely subject to its policies and agenda. 

Basharat refers to previous experiences, such as the model of the "Gaza Humanitarian" institution that was promoted with American support and Israeli coordination, as a preliminary attempt to create alternative frameworks for the traditional international humanitarian system, but within a ceiling that serves Israeli interests.

Tightening comprehensive control over the Strip..

Basharat believes that the second goal of this policy is to tighten comprehensive control over the Gaza Strip, so that Israel becomes the primary reference in everything related to the future of the Strip, starting from the humanitarian file, through the economic and social reality, to the security and political dimensions.

Basharat considers that this clearly reflects that any talk of an actual Israeli withdrawal from Gaza is not consistent with the Israeli vision, which seeks to manage the Strip directly or indirectly.

Basharat clarifies that Israel is working, in this context, to create a "dependent shadow" for itself within Gaza, whether through the humanitarian, security, military, or even political gateway, which allows it to remotely control all aspects of life in the absence of direct military presence.

Basharat cites the example of the crossings, which Israel controls completely, where it controls their opening and closing, and what enters or is prevented from entering the Strip, as a practical example of this pattern of control.

Basharat believes that among the goals of this policy is to empty the international dimension of the Gaza issue, and turn it into a bilateral Palestinian-Israeli conflict file, which justifies, from the Israeli point of view, excluding international intervention, and imposing policies that stem from security pretexts that may later develop into clear political goals.

Re-engineering the humanitarian and institutional structure..

Basharat warns of the possibility of the Strip entering a dangerous stage in the process of re-engineering its humanitarian and institutional structure, to become a structure completely subordinate to the Israeli vision, whether in terms of management, decision-making, or priorities.

Basharat suggests that Israel may allow a limited presence of some international institutions, but within a strict ceiling that ensures its complete control and keeps Gaza in a state of permanent humanitarian depletion, making it in continuous need of aid. 

Basharat did not rule out a scenario of effective international or regional action that restores the role of humanitarian institutions, but it is unlikely at the present stage, given the absolute American support for Israel, and the complexity of the humanitarian crisis that requires comprehensive international intervention beyond merely the presence of a number of relief institutions.

The two parties agreed to establish a joint coordination mechanism - a dedicated communications cell - to facilitate immediate and ongoing coordination on the exchange of intelligence information and military de-escalation.