The Security Council held a closed session on Tuesday morning to consult on the text of the draft resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, which was drafted by Algeria, Guyana, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, Sierra Leone, Mozambique, Malta, Ecuador, and Slovenia, which are the elected countries in the council (non-permanent), but Japan later withdrew from the list of sponsors of the draft resolution.

Al-Quds Al-Arabi learned that the United States threatened to use its veto against the draft resolution, despite the language being significantly softened and any reference to Chapter 7 or sanctions and accountability being dropped.

The draft text has been subject to several amendments, as it was put in its fourth form last Sunday since it was distributed to the council members on November 4, in its draft called “draft zero,” meaning subject to amendments and negotiations. It is expected to be voted on on Wednesday.

The non-permanent member states had agreed on the need to adopt a new resolution that goes beyond previous drafts, calls for an immediate ceasefire, reflects what is happening on the ground, and states that the situation “has become a threat to international peace and security,” a reference to Chapter VII, “without mentioning it in order to avoid an American veto so that the draft resolution does not repeat the four previous resolutions that remained on paper.”

The United States set a number of red lines in its negotiations, most notably the reference to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which stated that the situation in Gaza and regional developments have become a threat to international peace and security. This was deleted in later drafts and the language was softened to be more “moderate” and less direct in an attempt to win over the United States, while the non-permanent member states insisted that the draft should at least continue to call for an immediate, unconditional ceasefire and the unconditional release of hostages.

The first draft of the draft resolution stated that the Security Council “determines that the situation in the Gaza Strip and the regional escalation constitute a threat to international peace and security, and demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire to be respected by all parties.” The new paragraph became: “The Security Council recalls the primary responsibility to uphold international peace and security, and demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire to be respected by all parties.” This emptied the paragraph of its most important part, namely “recognition of the existence of a threat to international peace and security” and the consequences of resorting to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which means that failure by the parties to abide by the resolution could open the door to various possibilities, including imposing sanctions on the parties to the conflict for their failure to comply with the provisions of the resolution. The first draft also stated that the Security Council referred “to the interim orders issued by the International Court of Justice in the case of the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel) of 26 January, 28 March and 24 May 2024.” Here, too, the paragraph was amended, also due to American objections, as the paragraph became general and loose without mentioning Gaza to state, “The Security Council affirms that respect for the International Court of Justice and its functions, including the exercise of its advisory jurisdiction and its order to take provisional measures, is fundamental to international law, justice and the international order based on the rule of law.”

The American objections included the sixth operational paragraph related to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), which stated, after affirming the role of the Agency and its importance to the humanitarian response, that the Security Council “rejects measures that undermine the implementation of the Agency’s mandate, and welcomes the commitment of the Secretary-General and the Agency to fully implement the recommendations of the independent review of mechanisms and procedures to ensure UNRWA’s commitment to the principle of humanitarian neutrality. It calls on all parties to enable UNRWA to implement its mandate, as adopted by the General Assembly, in all areas of operations, with full respect for the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence, and to protect United Nations and humanitarian facilities, all in accordance with international humanitarian law and the Charter of the United Nations.”

When comparing the zero draft with the leaked draft and amendments, it is noted that the sentence in the aforementioned paragraph, which states that “the Security Council rejects measures that undermine the implementation of the Agency’s mandate due to US objections,” has been deleted. The significance of the deleted sentence, although it does not name Israel, is that it refers indirectly to the law recently passed by the Israeli Knesset that will halt UNRWA operations in the occupied territories by the end of January 2025. It seems that the non-permanent member states have reluctantly agreed to “soften” the language of the draft resolution in order to avoid a US veto, which has greatly weakened it and undermined the principle for which they took the initiative to draft a draft that would raise the Security Council to the level of responsibility and reflect what is happening on the ground, which undoubtedly constitutes a threat to international peace and security. Despite all these amendments and mitigations, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield may end her term as US Ambassador to the United Nations under President Biden by using her veto again to protect Israel from any accountability or real pressure, according to some indications from some diplomats at the United Nations.

By Eva Koulouriotis

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad inherited the alliance between Damascus and Tehran from his father. Over time, this alliance has become a necessity, particularly with the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in March 2011. But in the context of the current war in the Middle East, it has become a disturbing burden.

The image depicts several important political figures. It shows portraits of leaders such as the Iranian supreme leader, the Russian president, the Israeli prime minister, and the Syrian president, grouped together on a red background. The various members appear to be engaged in some kind of interaction or reflection, highlighting complex geopolitical relationships. The atmosphere of the image evokes themes of power and diplomacy in a context of international tensions.

On September 17 and 18, 2023, more than 3,000 pagers and walkie-talkies used by Hezbollah exploded. Particularly shocking in their scale, these events were the prelude to the Israeli military operation against the Lebanese militia, and sounded the alarm in both Beirut and Damascus.

A month earlier, the director of the General Intelligence Department of the Bashar Al-Assad regime, Major General Houssam Louqa, had made a secret visit to Beirut, where he met with Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Naim Qassem. Louqa had asked Hezbollah to reduce the escalation and not fall into the Israeli trap, given the military risk for both the Lebanese militia and the Syrian regime. Qassem had highlighted Hezbollah’s carefully thought-out, phased strategy and Israel’s weariness after a year of war in the Gaza Strip.

Naim Qassem and Hassan Nasrallah had in fact erred in their judgment by dismissing the risk of an Israeli offensive. The latter was assassinated on September 27, and the Assad regime found itself facing its most complex challenge since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in March 2011, with the stakes being control of the Syrian-Lebanese border, which is of strategic importance to Hezbollah and the Iranians, but also to Israel.

Hezbollah’s central role

Iranian leaders believe that a crushing defeat of Hezbollah would have negative consequences for their own national security. The Lebanese group’s existence has until now provided a deterrent to Iran and its nuclear program, serving as a frontline of confrontation and a tool for Tehran to blackmail Israel and the United States. The militia has also played a role in providing technical and logistical support to Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen. Hezbollah also helped save the Assad regime in the early years of the revolution against him, especially between 2012 and 2015. Tehran therefore considers that the defeat of Hezbollah would pose a risk to its national security and, in particular, to its nuclear program vis-à-vis Israel. This is why continuing to support Hezbollah via the Syrian-Lebanese border is a strategic priority, whatever the cost. A cost that particularly worries Bashar Al-Assad, whose eyes are fixed on Israel.

On the Israeli side, two issues are priorities in the Syrian theater. The first concerns the Syrian-Lebanese border and the second the militias supported by Iran in Syria. These concerns could become more intense given Tehran and Hezbollah’s refusal to accept defeat and make concessions that would encourage the Israeli government to end its military operation in Lebanon. Tel Aviv is, however, aware of the difficulty of continuing its offensive in the short term, after the American presidential election, despite the re-election of Donald Trump. Hence the decision to attack the porosity of the Syrian-Lebanese border, as evidenced by the recent statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: "We will cut Hezbollah's oxygen pipeline that connects Iran to Syria1."

Three military scenarios

In practice, three military scenarios are on the table of the Israeli government to obstruct this border. The first consists of extending the Israeli military offensive on land on Lebanese territory towards the Bekaa Valley, the regions of Baalbek and Hermel, to control the border. This scenario appears very costly and complex.

The second consists of launching a new land offensive in the southwest of Syrian territory, towards Quneitra, then towards the west of Damascus, towards Qalamoun and Homs, in order to close the border on the Syrian side. This scenario is constrained by the Russian presence in Syria and its costs would be high due to the strong presence of militias supported by Iran.

The third would be for Israel to intensify its airstrikes on both sides of the border. Since the beginning of the operation against Hezbollah, the Israeli air force has carried out dozens of airstrikes targeting official and unofficial crossing points on the Syrian-Lebanese border. Israel has also assassinated three leaders of Unit 4400, affiliated with Hezbollah and responsible for financing and supplying the group from Syrian territory, the most important of whom, Muhammad Jaafar Qasir, was a close personal friend of Bashar Al-Assad. But the effectiveness of these strikes seems to have been limited.

Based on this observation, Israel warned Assad of the need to take the decision to close these borders. But the latter has not yet responded to this warning, and for good reason.

The Syrian archipelago

The image shows a geographical map of Syria and its neighboring regions. The country’s borders can be seen, with colored areas that could represent different territorial controls or groups. The red part seems to indicate a main territory or one under the control of a certain group, while the yellow and green could symbolize other areas of control or influence. There are also Arabic inscriptions on the map, probably indicating cities or governorates. The geographic labels are arranged in such a way as to give an overview of the regions and important roads in this area.

Caption:

At Tehran’s mercy

After the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, Iran intervened militarily and directly protected Assad. With its support for military figures running for important positions and its relations with the leaders of the security services, its influence has grown within the Syrian regime itself. Tehran has also expanded its relations with major Syrian businessmen close to the regime. This interference has occurred in parallel with the deployment of thousands of Iranian-backed militia fighters from Iraq and Lebanon. Thus, Iran has gradually moved from being an ally protecting Assad to a partner in managing the territory. This reality forces Assad to think carefully before taking any steps that would thwart Iranian interests, including in areas under his control. A possible conflict over a strategic issue with the Iranian leadership could have serious repercussions on the security and economic situation in Syria and, possibly, on Assad himself. Based on these concerns, Assad is knocking on Russia’s door.

This is not the first time that Damascus has asked for Moscow’s help in a crisis involving Tehran and which poses a threat to the stability of the Syrian regime. In his book The Lost Novel, the former Syrian Vice President responsible for foreign affairs, Farouk Al-Charah, evokes the reaction of Hafez al-Assad after the outbreak of the first Gulf War between Iraq and Iran (1979-1989):

Hafez Al-Assad rushed to sign the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between Syria and the Soviet Union on October 8, 1980, which he had always hesitated to sign. This move is a response to this new variable.

During a surprise visit to Moscow in July 2023, Bashar Al-Assad met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who told him that the regional situation was deteriorating and that Syria was directly concerned. Yet Russia, despite the war in Ukraine and strategic cooperation with Tehran, still maintains close relations with Israel. Hence the fundamental question for Assad in his dilemma over the Syrian-Lebanese border: Will Moscow side with Tehran, Tel Aviv, or Damascus?

On September 8, in the Masyaf region, Israeli helicopters conducted a military operation against an installation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, presumably manufacturing warheads for ballistic missiles. At the Russian base of Hmeimim, located just a few kilometers from this area, a cautious calm reigned. The base’s S-400 air defense batteries, although having identified the Israeli kinetics, showed no reaction. This is in line with Moscow’s historical tolerance of Israeli airstrikes against Iranian interests in Syria. The Russians distinguish their interests in this country from those of Tehran, with the priority being the maintenance of the Syrian regime, and the preservation of their military bases on the Syrian coast, their only outlet to the Mediterranean Sea. Hence the absence of any notable reaction from Russia.

The Kremlin’s maps

The Soviet Union was not on the list of Iran’s allies before Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini came to power or after. During the first Gulf War between Iran and Iraq, the Soviet Union did not supply equipment to Tehran, but supported Baghdad, supplying it with fighter planes, missiles and munitions. It now appears that Moscow and Tehran have a more complex relationship than their politicians let on. Putin claims that the Islamic Republic is a strategic ally of Russia, and the Leader of the Revolution Ali Khamenei emphasizes the friendship with Moscow as well as their rapprochement with “the West.” However, behind these statements, contradictions emerge. For example, regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Tehran supports Moscow significantly, by supplying medium and long-range missiles, drones, and ensuring the transfer of technology to manufacture these drones in Russia. But in Yemen, this alliance differs in nature. Despite repeated requests from the Iranians and the Houthis for the supply of Russian-made Yakhont surface-to-sea missiles, Moscow is still hesitant. This hesitation is also reflected in the supply to Tehran of the S-400 system, which the Iranians still hope to obtain from the Kremlin urgently, particularly after the Israeli airstrike of October 26. Russia justifies its position by the complexity of the situation. Relations between Russia and Iran therefore change depending on the issue, including in the Syrian theater, where Moscow remains in retreat on the Iranian-Israeli conflict.

By connecting the wires coming from Tehran, Moscow and Tel Aviv to Damascus, Syria finds itself facing an equation that threatens the stability of the Muhajirin Palace (the Syrian presidential palace). The Iranians believe that obstructing the Syrian-Lebanese border will accelerate the defeat of Hezbollah and threaten their national security. For their part, the Israelis know that in order to weaken Hezbollah and prevent it from restoring its military capabilities, Assad must close its border with Lebanon. The Russians are not ready to intervene in this conflict. So they are at least trying to understand the intentions of each of the two parties without taking concrete measures, whether to serve as a mediator or, if necessary, to support one of the parties against the other. Assad finds himself alone between an ally who is pushing him into the abyss, another who is observing the scene from a distance and a neighbor who is resolutely serious in his threats.

Assad's Syria is trapped between these three parties. The assassination of Hassan Nasrallah by the Israelis and that of former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh on December 4, 2017, by the Houthis—probably with Iranian approval—fuel the latter’s fears. Not to mention that the Israelis consider Assad more than ever, not as a president useful to their interests, but as a threat to their national security and their regional projects. But the decision to get rid of him is only possible with the approval of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Source: ORIENT XXI

By Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler   

As U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee will likely go further in advocating for the destruction of Palestine, stepping up the holocaust in Gaza and pushing for the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank.

“Genocide Joe” was an accurate descriptor for Joe Biden, however no matter how bad Biden was on Palestine, and he was horrible, early signs are that Donald Trump and his cronies are going to be a million times worse. This is most clearly seen by the appointment of Rev. Mike Huckabee as ambassador to Israel.

Huckabee is a former presidential candidate and governor of Arkansas. But those things are not the problem. The problem is that Huckabee is a Christian Zionist and believes in “End of Times” prophecy, namely that Jews must be established in a sovereign state of Israel to usher in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. In this theology, Jesus will come again and reign over Israel and the world, and he will create a new age where all will be called to worship Christ. Christ will sit in judgment separating the righteous from the unrighteous – believers from nonbelievers. Those who believe will be welcomed into his kingdom and graces, and those who don’t will be condemned into Hell and torment. 

Mike Huckabee is a Southern Baptist minister. The Southern Baptist Church was founded as a break from the Baptist movement over the issue of slavery in 1845. The Southern Baptist Church on its founding supported slavery, and after the Civil War were ardent supporters of the politics of the “Lost Cause,” which included segregation. It wasn’t until 1995 that the church formally apologized for its support of slavery. And to right its historical wrongs in 2017 condemned white supremacy. However, the church recently voted in 2023 to ban women from serving as Pastors in its churches. In 2024 a proposal was put forth to affirm the 2023 decision, but that vote failed narrowly missing the 2/3rds required to pass. Some proponents of the ban suggested that there were already ways to remove churches from its ranks that had women pastors, so the proposal was not necessary. This is relevant because this is the denominational and theological/ideological base of Mike Huckabee, and as a Minister of the Southern Baptist tradition he brings these predilections into public life.    

You can sometimes catch Huckabee on late night or early morning TV raising funds or engaging in his monologues on the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN). TBN billed Huckabee as “America’s favorite front porch” talk show. His show is described as “the hour-long program…a down-home slice of wholesome Americana in all of its patriotic, God-honoring, and family-friendly glory.” But what signals his bias towards Israel are his appeals on behalf of the International Fellowship for Christians and Jews (IFCJ) whose agenda is to support Israel, offer assistance to indigent Jews, and assist with Aliyah (financially assisting Jews to make a home in Israel). This fits with his theological agenda of bringing Jews to Israel in fulfillment of his understanding of prophecy where the sovereignty of Israel as a Jewish “homeland” is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Christ. IFCJ’s website reads, “As the war shows no signs of slowing down, many Jewish people are struggling. “YOU can give hope today with your best gift. Donate to provide food, medicine, and other necessities. “I will bless those who bless [Israel]”, citing Genesis 12:3.

Huckabee shortly after the announcement of his ambassadorship to Israel spoke to Israel’s Army radio stating “of course” annexation of the West Bank is a possibility. This is his latest statement in a litany of other problematic statements. As a candidate for President in 2008 Huckabee stated that Palestinian identity was “a political tool to try and force land away from Israel.” Huckabee has maintained throughout his years in ministry and public life that the West Bank belongs to Israel, rationalizing it in this way, “the title deed was given by God to Abraham and to his heirs.” Furthermore, Huckabee believes that there is no such a thing as a Palestinian – “There really isn’t such a thing,” he said earlier on this year. There is a lot to be concerned with in the appointment of Huckabee as the point person in Israel.

In response to the news of the Huckabee pick Luis Moreno, a former Chief of Mission to Israel and former Ambassador to Jamaica wrote on Twitter, “I unfortunately was exposed to him during his visits to Israel back in the day. Full blown (and knowledgeable) fanatic of the End of Times, Apocalypse, Israel’s destruction, etc. A true and utter nut case. Couldn’t be a more dangerous selection.”

Yet this is the choice that is before us, and his influence in the Trump administration will not fare well for the Palestinians of Gaza or the West Bank. The fact is that Mike Huckabee is going to go further in advocating for the destruction of Palestine than the Biden administration has, offer justification for stepping up the holocaust in Gaza, and push for the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank. Huckabee obviously believes that God is hate-filled and delights in the murder and genocide of men, women, and children. He believes that God is a homicidal maniac that only wants to have God’s agenda addressed as interpreted by those steeped in religious bias and coming from a historical framework of slavery, misogyny, and white supremacy. This pick will make things a million times worse for the cause of a free Palestine. 

This means that those of us in the Palestinian Justice Movement must double our efforts of agitation and education. We must push these next four years for Palestinian self-determination and to dismantle the Israeli apartheid system. We must show up and speak out. We must challenge Congress, and politicians at the local level to keep Palestine on their lips and in the consciousness of the public. Trump and Huckabee will seek to erase Palestine along with the crimes of the West Bank and Gaza (and now Lebanon), and it is up to us whether they succeed in this erasure or not.

By Craig Mokhiber 

The delay in issuing ICC warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, followed by the replacement of the presiding judge, has raised serious concerns about the court's functioning and possible machinations behind the scenes. 

On May 20, 2024, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Karim Khan, submitted a request to the ICC for warrants to arrest Israeli leaders Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including extermination. 

In the same statement, he included an extraordinary warning, saying “I insist that all attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence the officials of this Court must cease immediately. My Office will not hesitate to act pursuant to article 70 of the Rome Statute if such conduct continues.”

The Prosecutor did not elaborate on the source of the threats against the ICC officials. 

The Court, in accordance with its established procedures, then assigned the case to a three-judge, pre-trial chamber, presided over by Judge Iulia Motoc.  

Only eight days after the Prosecutor announced the warrant requests and his warning about intimidation of Court officials, the Guardian and +972 Magazine published an exposé revealing a decade of interference, pressure, and threats by notorious Israeli intelligence agencies against personnel of the International Criminal Court in order to derail investigations of Israeli crimes. 

But by then the Court had gone silent on the Palestine file- a silence that would last for five months. Court watchers were left to wonder, and worry, about the unprecedented delay in the issuance of the warrants. 

And then, as if on cue, sometime around early October, pro-Israel publications began circulating anonymous allegations accusing the ICC Prosecutor of harassing a female staff member. 

Just days later, on October 20, 2024, the ICC announced that Motoc, the Presiding Judge of the three-judge pre-trial chamber assigned to decide whether to issue arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister and Defense Minister, had suddenly stepped down. 

Citing unspecified “health reasons,” the Court provided no further information. Motoc was replaced by Slovenian Judge Beti Hohler, with French Judge Nicolas Guillou now Presiding over the chamber. 

In ordinary times, these developments might hardly be noticed. But these are not ordinary times, and this is no ordinary case. 

Israel, a state that had enjoyed 75 years of Western-backed impunity, was finally, it seemed, being called to account for its crimes. Already on trial for genocide in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the subject of a series of provisional orders there, Israeli leaders received notice in May from across town in The Hague that the net was continuing to close. 

The request submitted in May by the prosecutor to the ICC for warrants to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant brought a predictable response from Israel, which launched angry recriminations, invective, and the usual tactical smears against the Court. 

It was instantly joined by its Western government allies in attacking the Prosecutor’s request, with U.S. officials going so far as to threaten the Court itself. 

Now, the delay in issuing the warrants, followed by the announcement of the replacement of the presiding judge, has raised serious concerns about the functioning of the Court, and about possible machinations behind the scenes. 

Interference and delays

The situation of this five-month delay coming within almost a full decade of stalling since the first preliminary investigation of Israel’s crimes in Palestine was opened has only exacerbated those fears. 

By comparison, a request for a warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin was fulfilled by the ICC in three weeks. And in its other cases, the Court has on average taken about eight weeks to issue warrants. 

The coming of these latest developments on the heels of revelations of years of threats and harassment of judges and court officials by Israeli intelligence operatives and Western government officials has put the followers of the Court and opponents of Israeli impunity on heightened alert. 

In one case, the head of the Mossad himself threatened the previous ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and her family. (To her credit, Bensouda resisted the attacks and, acting with exemplary courage and principle, proceeded to open an investigation on Israeli crimes). 

The change in Judges in this case is expected to further prolong the decision on the warrants in an already inordinately delayed process. And the unprecedented (and now compounded) delays have raised questions about whether there are “behind the scenes” factors at play. 

But Israel is not the only state interfering with the work of the ICC. Acting on Israel’s behalf, U.S. legislators, the State Department, and U.S. National Security Council officials have joined forces to pressure, threaten and try to derail the case against Israeli officials, even threatening sanctions against the Court. 

Substantive risks

While it is impossible to know how these judges will ultimately rule, and there is nothing in the public record that would call into question their judicial integrity, changes in the chamber’s composition could also have important substantive implications. 

For example, new Judge Hohler published an article in 2015 (long before joining the ICC) in which she suggested that complementarity may bar scrutiny of Israel because “Israel in general has a well-functioning legal system headed by a respected Supreme Court.” 

Leaving aside the broad international criticism of the Israeli Supreme Court (already evident in 2015) for its long record of approving apartheid policies and state crimes against Palestinians, and for its long record of tolerance of Israeli war crimes, it has since become clear that Israel has no intention of investigating or prosecuting Netanyahu or Gallant for the crimes alleged in the ICC Prosecutor’s request for arrest warrants. 

We must hope that Judge Hohler will by now realize that any complementarity objections (i.e., that Israel will investigate itself) are entirely without merit, as the ICJ has already found. But her earlier deeply distorted assessment of the Israeli justice system is nevertheless cause for concern. 

And, in the same article, Judge Hohler also implied that external political considerations may influence Court decisions because “the ICC is heavily dependent on the support of its states parties, including for any type of enforcement as well as for actually ensuring the attendance of suspected perpetrators at The Hague.” 

While that may be true, and many parties to the (Rome) statute of the ICC are Western allies of Israel, concerns about implementation should play no role in decisions of the Judges on the merits. 

For his part, new Presiding Judge Guillou of France came to the Court with a strong “counterterrorism” profile. He served previously as the Chef de Cabinet for the President of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which convicted a member of Hezbollah in the 2005 assassination of Rafik Harri, and as a former Liaison to the U.S. Justice Department where he worked with the U.S. on (inter alia) counterterrorism prosecutions in the height of the highly abusive U.S. “war on terrorism.”  

Judge Guillou has also (before joining the Court) argued publicly for the prosecution of non-state “terrorism” in international tribunals (which has only ever happened in the Lebanon Tribunal which he served), despite the lack of a definition of terrorism in international law and over the objections of human rights defenders and others concerned about the corrosive legal effect of “War on Terror” framings in criminal matters and in situations of armed conflict. 

None of this proves any irregularities in the change of composition of the chamber, nor suggests any evidence of anything unethical on the part of the judges. But neither is the law a machine in which decisions are reached based on the neutral application of law to the facts. The opinions, experiences, predispositions, and biases of judges matter. Anyone seeking to influence the court will know this. 

And this fact does not even factor in the corrupting influence of the Israeli threats and the U.S. pressure campaigns against ICC personnel. 

Human rights defenders remember well how a similar pressure campaign launched by Israel against Judge Richard Goldstone, who headed the UN Fact Finding Mission on Gaza in 2009, compelled Goldstone to essentially recant the findings of the Mission, effectively destroying his reputation in international legal and human rights circles after a decades-long and storied career in the law. 

Accusing the Prosecutor

Adding to worries about attacks on the Court’s independence, in October a small, anonymous X account tweeted unsubstantiated third-party allegations that ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan had harassed a female staff member. 

Somehow, the Daily Mail, a right-wing, pro-Israel English tabloid (that had become notorious for publishing Israeli disinformation, and that has been banned by English Wikipedia for its unreliability and fabrications) found this small X account and reprinted the allegations. From there, the story was repeated by pro-Israel news sites across the West.   

While it is impossible to know if there is any truth to the allegations, Khan has denied them and said they are part of the campaign of threats and harassment against he and the Court for their work. 

For her part, the alleged victim filed no complaint, and neither she nor the Court’s Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM) saw fit to proceed with any investigations or charges. 

What is clear, however, is that this anonymous accusation quickly became fodder for a campaign of delegitimization against the Prosecutor and, by extension, the ICC. 

Pro-Israel media and proxy groups, seeing the propaganda value of linking the allegations to the case against Netanyahu and Gallant, reported them with headlines like “War Crimes Prosecutor Who Charged Netanyahu Accused of Sexual Misconduct”, in a clear attempt to discredit the charges against the Israeli defendants. 

Hustling the Hague

What we do know is that (1) the Court, either out of fear or favor, has long been reticent to move forward on cases against Israelis, (2) Israeli and Western intelligence agencies and government actors have been working to pressure ICC judges and court officials, and (3) the delays on the Palestine file are already unprecedented.

With this knowledge, we must at least ask three questions:

First, whether Judge Motoc’s “health grounds” were contributed to or were cover for something more sinister. 

Secondly, whether the subsequent replacement appointments were at all influenced by the substantive positions of the judges, presumed or real.  

And third, whether the changes were designed to justify further delays in the proceedings, thereby benefitting Israeli defendants and providing more time for backroom manipulation. 

Barring further leaks or revelations from the ICC, we may not know the answer to these questions until the gavel has banged, if at all. 

But knowing the fact that the judicial delays continue to grow even as extermination in Palestine continues unabated, coupled with the knowledge that nefarious actors have been targeting the Court to obstruct justice, public vigilance is imperative. 

Both the ICC and those who would seek to corrupt it should be on notice that the world is watching. 

Reputational risk

Indeed, the reputations of the ICC, its judges, and its current prosecutor are already badly tattered, owing not only to a decade of delays on the Palestine file but also to a dramatic imbalance in action globally. 

The Court has focused almost entirely on the global South, and on presumed adversaries of the West. To date, perpetrators from Israel and all other Western countries have enjoyed complete impunity under the Rome Statute of the ICC. 

For States in the Global South, and justice advocates around the World, the ICC is increasingly suspect. A failure to deliver justice in the current case, and any perception of bias on behalf of Israel, any concession to U.S. pressure, or to the Court’s Western sponsors, will almost certainly represent the beginning of the end of the ICC. 

Prosecuting offenses against the administration of justice

But Israel and the U.S. should take particular note. The risk they face goes beyond mere reputational risk. The kind of interference in which they have been involved is not only a moral outrage but also a breach of international law. 

And some of the acts revealed could be subject to criminal prosecution by the Court itself. 

Article 70 of the Rome Statute of the ICC codifies crimes against the administration of justice, and, importantly, grants the Court jurisdiction to prosecute these crimes. 

These include “impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties”, and “retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official” (among other offenses). 

Those convicted of these offenses can be imprisoned by the ICC for up to five years. 

Additionally, every State Party to the Rome Statute would be legally obliged to prosecute any such offenses if they are committed by its nationals or on its territory. While the US and Israel are not parties to the ICC, most of its closest Western allies are and would be compelled to cooperate. 

And the Netherlands, in which the ICC is situated, is obliged under a host country agreement with the Court to ensure the safety and security of Court personnel and to protect the ICC from interference. 

Indeed, Dutch prosecutors are now considering legal action against senior Israeli intelligence officials for their pressure and threats against ICC officials in the Palestine cases. 

Last chance for justice

The risks to the ICC are real. 

Both Israel and the U.S. have demonstrated that they have no respect for the rule of law, and no qualms about threatening or otherwise corrupting the Court. 

And the ICC itself has a long way to go to prove to the world that it is committed to its mandated role of universal justice rather than serving as a mere selective arm of Western power. 

But the strength of the case against Netanyahu, Gallant, and other Israeli leaders, in the world’s first live-streamed genocide, and under the glare of unprecedented public attention, gives reason for hope. 

Today, Israel is on trial, its leaders are on trial, and the system of international justice itself is on trial.

Nefarious actors are working both publicly and in the shadows to obstruct the course of justice. 

If justice is to prevail, we must all remain vigilant.

A new report has emerged detailing the last disturbing moments of Dr Adnan Al-Bursh's life, with the surgeon having been tortured in Israeli detention.

A new report on Thursday revealed chilling new details of the circumstances surrounding the killing of the famous Gaza surgeon Adnan Al-Bursh in an Israeli prison in May.

A captive at Israel’s Ofer Prison in the occupied West Bank told Sky News how Israeli forces left Dr Al-Bursh, who had been severely tortured, to die alone in agonising pain and naked from the waist down in the prison’s yard.

The captive, who previously knew Dr Al-Bursh in Gaza, provided details in a deposition to lawyers from the Israeli human rights organisation HaMoked.

"In mid-April 2024, Dr Adnan Al-Bursh arrived at Section 23 in Ofer Prison. The prison guards brought Dr Adnan Al-Bursh into the section in a deplorable state. He had clearly been assaulted with injuries around his body. He was naked in the lower part of his body.

"The prison guards threw him in the middle of the yard and left him there. Dr Adnan Al-Bursh was unable to stand up. One of the prisoners helped him and accompanied him to one of the rooms. A few minutes later, prisoners were heard screaming from the room they went into, declaring Dr Adnan Al-Bursh (was dead)."

Dr Al-Bursh was widely regarded as one of the best qualified and well known surgeons in the Palestinian enclave, with a picture of him in 2018, covered in the blood of a victim of Israeli bombing, going viral and catapulting him to a grim form of fame.

When Israel’s war on Gaza broke out in October of last year, Dr Al-Bursh worked at al-Shifa hospital as the head of orthopaedic surgery. By November, Israel had the hospital under siege forcing Dr Al-Bursh, along with all the staff and patients, to flee.

After serving at the Indonesian hospital in Bait Lahia and documenting Israeli forces besieging and firing indiscriminately at patients and staff, killing 12, he was once again ordered to leave as Israel systematically destroyed Gaza’s health system.

Dr Al-Bursh then moved to Al-Awda hospital in Gaza’s north, where Israeli forces familiarly surrounded and besieged.

It was here that Al-Bursh was taken by Israeli forces.

"[The director] told us that the [Israeli army] have full data of all males aged between 14 and 65 at Awda hospital," his colleague Dr Mohammad Obeid told Sky News,. "They told him that if all men do not come down… they will destroy the Awda Hospital with all the women and children in it," he added.

After Dr Al-Bursh left he hospital, Israeli soldiers "called his name out" and then “roughly” took him away, according to Obeid.

Dr Al-Bursh was then taken to the notorious Sde Teiman detention facility in the Negev, which whistleblowers and former inmates have likened to a concentration camp.

Reports of physical, mental, and sexual abuse are widespread at Sde Teiman, with instances of rape so severe that prisoners have been died and seriously injured.. Dr Khalid Hamouda, a former inmate of the Sde Teiman camp, told Sky News that many of the prisoners held there were medical professionals.

It is here that Al-Bursh underwent brutal torture, being viciously beaten by Israeli guards. The full extent of his torture is not known.

"He thought he may have broken ribs," Dr Hamouda said. "He was unable to even go to the toilet alone."

It was after this that Dr. Al-Bursh was sent to Ofer Prison where he would die within weeks.

Israel has accused Dr Al-Bursh of being a “terrorist”, yet, like most of the captives in both Sde Teiman and Ofer prison, he was never charged with any criminal offenses.

Dozens of Palestinian captives have been killed in Israeli detention since 7 October, with numerous cases of them having been subject to extreme torture.

At least 43,764 Palestinians have been killed by Israel since it launched its war on Gaza.

By Amir Tibon 

Despite the fact that Israel has eliminated almost all of Hamas' senior leadership, and the urgency of securing the hostages' release – it is actually Gaza where Netanyahu and his allies reject a cease-fire agreement

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich during a Knesset session in Jerusalem on Monday.

The biggest news story in the Middle East this week has been the unmistakable momentum behind a cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah. The war between the Israel Defense Forces and the Lebanese terror group continues to rage on, with daily Israeli bombings in different parts of Lebanon and rockets being launched deep into Israeli territory. Still, diplomatic efforts to put an end to the fighting seem to be gathering steam.

U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein is displaying optimism that a deal to end the northern front of Israel's more-than-yearlong war can be reached within days, and implemented before President Joe Biden leaves the White House exactly two months from tomorrow. Biden's successor, President-elect Donald Trump, has voiced his support for a cease-fire after promising Lebanese-American voters ahead of the election that he would bring peace to their homeland.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right coalition partners also seem willing to reach a war-ending deal in the north, which would be based on UN Security Council Resolution 1701, and include the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces from the border with Israel. Trump's push for a deal is probably having an impact on Netanyahu: the last thing he needs is to annoy the incoming president by prolonging a war Trump pledged to finish.

But all of that raises one unavoidable question: Why are Netanyahu and his allies showing relative flexibility in negotiations over a Lebanon cease-fire, but refusing to do the same with regards to Gaza?

No one in Israel believes that a cease-fire agreement with Hezbollah will mean that the powerful terror group is no longer a threat to Israelis citizens. Yes, Hezbollah suffered devastating losses in recent months, starting with the exploding pagers operation and followed by a breathtaking series of assassinations of its senior leadership. But even after all these blows, the organization continues to fire hundreds of rockets into Israel on a daily basis, and has successfully utilized drones to strike deep into Israel and overcome the country's aerial defense systems.

Hezbollah will still be capable of doing all of these things after a cease-fire, and will remain an important, powerful player in the Lebanese political arena. No one in Israel will be able to argue that the organization had been completely decimated.

Yet in Gaza, an agreement that would lead to the release of Israel's approximately 100 hostages from the hands of Hamas, in return for a cease-fire that would end the war there, is treated by Netanyahu and his allies as a form of blasphemy. The same logic that guides the Lebanon negotiations – Israel's enemy has been crippled and weakened but not totally destroyed, and now it's time to end the fighting, allow Israeli communities evacuated from the border area to return home, and avoid further Israeli casualties – is just as relevant in the case of Gaza.

Yet despite the fact that Israel has eliminated almost all of Hamas' senior leadership, and the urgency of securing the release of the hostages – who are still being held by terrorists, facing daily threats of hunger, rape and torture – it is actually Gaza where Netanyahu and his allies reject a war-ending cease-fire agreement.

It is hard not to suspect that the reason for the differentiation between Lebanon and Gaza has to do with the wishes of the Israeli far-right to construct settlements in the Strip, mostly in its northern part which Israel has been trying for the past two months to empty of all Palestinian civilians. There is no similar demand from the far right to build settlements in Lebanon.

The dismal result is that while the war in Lebanon seems to be moving toward a resolution, the fighting in Gaza continues and the lives of the hostages are in extreme, immediate danger.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Israel of "practicing state terrorism," stressing that his country will continue to stand with the oppressed.

In a press conference held by the Turkish President on the sidelines of his participation in the G20 summit in Brazil, Erdogan said that "the human cost of state terrorism practiced by Israel in the region with the support of Western powers is increasing day by day."

He added that "the world has not yet taken the position we were waiting for against Israel's injustice," stressing that Turkey will continue this struggle in cooperation with its friends, stressing that Turkey will continue to stand by the oppressed even if it remains alone in this.

The Turkish President stressed that "his country's problem is with those who are dragging the region into chaos and instability through the policy of occupation and invasion."

He pointed out that as a result of Türkiye's initiative, strong phrases regarding Gaza were included in the G20 leaders' declaration.

He stressed the importance of more countries recognizing the State of Palestine during this period.

He pointed out that "history will not forgive those who remain silent, under any pretext, regarding this violence and this escalating pace of brutality."

Erdogan explained that "the UN Security Council has turned into an elite structure that serves the interests of only 5 permanent members instead of protecting the rights of 193 UN member states."

He expressed his hope that the new US administration would take bolder, wiser and more supportive steps towards peace.

Regarding Russia's updating of its nuclear doctrine, Erdogan said, "We cannot say that a war in which nuclear weapons are used has a positive side."

"We hope to reach a final ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine as soon as possible and provide the peace the world is waiting for," he added.

Saudi Arabia and Iran affirmed yesterday (Tuesday) their full commitment to implementing the agreement they reached on March 10, 2023, expressing their appreciation for the important role played by Beijing, while China affirmed its readiness to continue supporting and encouraging the steps taken by the two countries towards developing their relations in various fields.

Twenty months after the historic reconciliation was announced and relations resumed under Chinese auspices, the Saudi and Iranian sides renewed their commitment to implementing the Beijing Agreement in all its provisions, and to continue their efforts to strengthen good-neighborly relations between their two countries by adhering to the United Nations Charter, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Charter, and international law, including respect for the sovereignty, independence, and security of states. This position was issued shortly after the second meeting of the Saudi-Chinese-Iranian Tripartite Joint Committee to follow up on the Beijing Agreement was held in Riyadh yesterday, headed by Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Al-Khuraiji, with the participation of the Chinese delegation headed by Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Deng Li, and the Iranian delegation headed by Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs Majid Takht Ravanchi.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) announced on Tuesday that more than 200 children have been killed in Lebanon in nearly two months since the start of the Israeli occupation escalation, at a rate of more than three children per day.

“Despite the large number of children who have lost their lives in such a short period of time, there is a worrying trend of indifference to these deaths by parties capable of de-escalating the situation,” said James Elder, a spokesman for the organization, in a press statement.

"We must all strive to ensure that humanity never again witnesses such a massacre of children as happened previously in the Gaza Strip, and what is unacceptable should not become acceptable," Elder added.

He called for immediate action to stop targeting children and ensure their protection in times of conflict.

On Tuesday, UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani discussed intensifying efforts to cease fire and reach a comprehensive truce in the Middle East region.

This came during Bin Zayed's reception of the Qatari Prime Minister, on Tuesday, at Al Shati Palace in Abu Dhabi, according to the official Emirates News Agency, "WAM".

The agency reported that the two sides discussed "relations between the two countries and various aspects of their cooperation and joint work in a way that contributes to achieving their mutual interests and enhancing security and stability in the region."

The two sides discussed a number of regional and international issues and developments of common interest and exchanged views on them, according to the same source.

The UAE President and the Qatari Prime Minister stressed the "importance of intensifying efforts towards a ceasefire and reaching a comprehensive calm in the Middle East region, in addition to intensifying efforts to prevent the expansion of the conflict in a way that preserves regional security and stability," according to WAM.

The Qatari Prime Minister and his accompanying delegation arrived earlier on Tuesday at Al Bateen Airport in Abu Dhabi, according to WAM, which did not specify the duration of the visit.

US envoy Amos Hochstein said there was a "real opportunity" to end the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel as he visited Lebanon to discuss a ceasefire agreement.

Hochstein made the comments in Beirut on Tuesday after what he described as "very constructive talks" with Nabih Berri, the Lebanese parliament speaker who has been backed by Hezbollah to negotiate a deal.

"This is a decision-making moment. I am here in Beirut to facilitate this decision, but ultimately it is up to the parties to decide what to do with this conflict. It is now in our hands," he said, according to CNN.

The Biden administration is making a last-ditch effort to broker a truce as fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military escalates.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed on Monday to continue "systematically operating" against Hezbollah even if a ceasefire agreement is reached.

“This is unworkable for Lebanon. They see it as a violation of the country’s sovereignty,” Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr reported from the Lebanese capital.

“Since the window is now open, I hope the coming days will bring about a decisive decision,” Hochstein said, but he would not answer reporters’ questions about the talks so as not to “negotiate this publicly.”

"I am committed to doing my utmost to work with the governments of Lebanon and Israel to bring this all to an end," he added.

US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Monday that Washington had shared the proposals with Lebanon and Israel, and both sides had responded to the plan. Miller said the United States was pushing for “full implementation” of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which was adopted following the last war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006. The resolution calls for Hezbollah to withdraw north of the Litani River — about 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) from the border demarcation line between Lebanon and Israel — and for Israeli forces to withdraw from Lebanese territory and deploy the Lebanese army in the south of the country alongside UN peacekeepers.

Reuters quoted an aide to Berri as saying on Monday that the Lebanese government and Hezbollah had agreed to the US proposal, which was submitted in writing last week.

During a visit to Beirut in October, Hochstein said commitments to the UN resolution were insufficient because it had failed to be implemented since it was adopted 18 years ago. He called instead for a new enforcement mechanism.

Two young men were killed by Israeli occupation forces on Tuesday evening in the eastern neighborhood of Jenin.

According to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, the occupation forces released its crew, which they had besieged inside a house in the eastern neighborhood of the city, and handed over to them the bodies of two dead who were inside the house, and they were transferred to Jenin Governmental Hospital.

The occupation forces had shot two young men during their raid on the eastern neighborhood of the city, leaving them bleeding and preventing ambulance crews from transporting them, which led to their martyrdom.

The occupation forces have continued their aggression on the city of Jenin and its camp since the early hours of today. During this aggression, 9 citizens were injured by live bullets and shrapnel from a shell fired by an Israeli drone, amidst the destruction of the infrastructure, which caused power and water outages in large neighborhoods in the city and the camp.

With the martyrdom of the two young men in the eastern neighborhood of Jenin, the number of dead in Jenin Governorate today rises to five, as three young men were martyred by the occupation forces’ bullets earlier today in the village of the Martyrs’ Triangle, south of the governorate. They are: Raed Abdul Rahman Sadiq Hanaysha (24 years old), Anwar Nidal Tawfiq Saba’neh (25 years old), and Adnan Suleiman Tazaza’a (32 years old).

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a request from the negotiating team to expand its powers to enable it to reach a prisoner exchange agreement with Hamas, according to Hebrew media on Tuesday evening.

For months, the Israeli negotiating team has been complaining, according to media reports and opposition leaders, about the lack of powers granted to it by Netanyahu, which prevents reaching an agreement through indirect negotiations with Hamas.

Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper said on its website that Netanyahu met earlier this week with the negotiating team.

She continued: Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yisrael Katz rejected "the proposals of the negotiating team leaders regarding a deal to return the kidnapped (Israeli prisoners in the Gaza Strip), as they sought to expand the scope of the powers to conduct the negotiations and bypass the issue of ending the war."

Netanyahu insists on continuing to occupy the Netzarim Corridor in the middle of the Gaza Strip, the Philadelphi Corridor, and the Rafah Crossing (south), and refuses to stop the war as part of any prisoner exchange deal, while Hamas insists on ending the war and the complete withdrawal of the Israeli army.

During the meeting, Mossad chief David Barnea and Major General Nitzan Alon, the army's representative on the negotiating team, "requested more room for negotiations and stressed that without additional room for maneuver in the terms, it would not be possible to move forward," according to the newspaper.

The newspaper quoted unnamed informed sources as saying that Netanyahu, with the support of Katz, rejected the request.

"Unfortunately, there are no negotiations and everything is collapsing. We are talking to ourselves. There is no progress," the sources added.

In response to a request for comment from the newspaper, Netanyahu's office called the story a "false and biased leak," and claimed that it "aims to subject Israel to Hamas's dictates."

Tel Aviv is holding no less than 9,500 Palestinians in its prisons, and estimates that there are 101 Israeli prisoners in Gaza, while Hamas announced the killing of dozens of them in random Israeli raids.

The Israeli opposition accuses Netanyahu of refusing to end the war and withdraw from Gaza for fear of collapsing his government coalition, in light of extremist ministers threatening to withdraw from it.

UNIFIL peacekeeping forces were hit by three separate incidents in southern Lebanon on Tuesday, injuring six of their soldiers, amid rising tensions in the region.

Four Ghanaian peacekeepers were injured when a rocket - likely fired from non-state actors inside Lebanon - targeted their base "UNP 5-42" east of the town of Ramyeh. Three of them were transferred to a hospital in Tyre for treatment.

UNIFIL’s Sector West Headquarters in Shamaa was hit five times, hitting a maintenance workshop inside the base. Despite the extensive damage, no peacekeepers were injured. This is the second attack on the base in less than a week, after a 155mm artillery shell hit it on 15 November.

A UNIFIL patrol northeast of Khirbet Selem village came under direct fire from an armed man. No casualties were reported among the troops as a result of this incident.

UNIFIL announced that it had launched investigations into the three incidents and reported them to the Lebanese Armed Forces. It called on all parties to respect the sanctity of its forces and installations, stressing that the repeated attacks - direct and indirect - against peacekeepers constitute a flagrant violation of international law and resolution 1701.

UNIFIL stressed that any attack on peacekeeping forces threatens the stability of the region, affirming its commitment to remain in its positions and continue its tasks of monitoring and reporting violations in an impartial manner, despite the increasing challenges.

As he tapped former congressman and TV host Sean Duffy to be transportation secretary, President-elect Donald Trump pushed to confirm his nominees for top posts in his incoming administration, including his ethics-plagued attorney general, Matt Gaetz, in what promises to be an early test of strength in the Republican-controlled Senate.

CNN reported that Trump is in contact with senators “to pressure them” to confirm Gates early next year, despite “increasing counter-pressure” from Republican senators who want to see the House Ethics Committee’s report on Gates’ conduct regarding an intimate relationship he had with a minor. The controversy took another turn when the attorney for two women who appeared before the Ethics Committee, attorney Joel Lippard, revealed that they had testified that they had received money in exchange for “sexual favors” with Gates. One of them was quoted as saying that she had seen Gates in an intimate position with her underage friend in 2017.

Given this information, the president-elect has acknowledged in private conversations recently that Gates has a slim chance of being confirmed by the Senate. But he has shown no sign of withdrawing the nomination. He has seemed confident that his other, more questionable nominees will hold their ground, including Robert Kennedy as secretary of health and human services despite his skepticism about vaccines and common treatments; Fox News host Pete Hegseth, whose suitability for the job of defense secretary is questionable; and Tulsi Gabbard, a favorite of Russian media, as director of national intelligence. All of them have in common that they are staunch Trump loyalists to his “America First” and “Make America Great Again” slogans, as well as hardliners on China, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela.

Senators split

The ethics committee report has become a major crisis for the second Trump administration, as it could lead to a defection of a handful of Republican senators who oppose Gaetz’s nomination. House Speaker Mike Johnson insisted before a meeting of the ethics committee that the report should not be released, because Gaetz resigned from his congressional position last week and therefore no longer falls under congressional rules.

But that justification hasn’t convinced some senators, who are under pressure from Trump to support his pick. It’s possible that enough senators would be willing to risk their careers to oppose Gaetz’s nomination, though it’s unclear what Trump’s backup plan would be if Gaetz falters. The New York Times reported that Trump’s personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, could be a backup.

Trump has threatened to retire or defeat most of the congressional Republicans who opposed him in his first term. Since the defeat of Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump has made clear that he will not tolerate any significant opposition from the GOP majorities in the House and Senate.

However, Gaetz could also be confirmed, along with the other three candidates who have caused such a stir in Washington. Trump has wasted no time in moving forward and personally lobbying senators, but one thing is certain: his four choices would have had almost no chance of being confirmed in the Republican-controlled Senate in Washington, which was in place before 2024.

Controversial appointments

In addition to Gates, Hegseth faces allegations that he also assaulted a woman. Hegseth, a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, also faces questions about whether he has the experience to run a Defense Department with an annual budget of $850 billion, three million employees and 750 military bases around the world.

Trump’s choice of Kennedy also raised questions, not only because he is a vaccine skeptic but also because he supports abortion rights and has declared war on the pharmaceutical and food industries that have long funded the Republican Party. His choice of Gabbard cast a heavy shadow because she blamed the United States and NATO for “provoking” Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Hegseth could lead Trump’s efforts to remove generals and other senior Pentagon leaders he sees as impediments to his policy agenda. Reuters reported last week that Trump’s transition team was preparing lists of Pentagon officials to be fired. The team is also considering whether to try some current and former officers who were directly involved in the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in a military tribunal, NBC News reported.

Trump's White House press secretary, Carolyn Leavitt, said the president-elect had won "a resounding mandate from the American people to change the status quo in Washington," adding that he had selected "highly respected, brilliant outsiders to serve in his administration, and he will continue to stand behind them as they fight back against all those who seek to derail the MAGA agenda."

Davi for the Ministry of Transport

Meanwhile, the president-elect has chosen Sean Duffy as transportation secretary, a job that comes with a huge budget and sweeping safety responsibilities, and plays a key role in overseeing companies run by billionaire Elon Musk.

Duffy was an early reality TV star in the 1990s. He then served as district attorney for Ashland County, Wisconsin, before being elected to Congress in 2010, resigning his seat in 2019 after learning that his youngest child was due to be born with health problems.

Duffy was an early supporter of Trump, urging him in 2021 to run for governor of Wisconsin, saying he “would be great!”

Trump said in a statement Monday that Duffy “will prioritize excellence, efficiency, competitiveness and beauty when rebuilding America’s highways, tunnels, bridges and airports,” and “will ensure that our ports and dams serve our economy without compromising our national security, and will make our skies safe again.”

The Israeli occupation army expanded the scope of its operations in an attempt to cut off the coastal road south of Tyre at the Al-Bayada point, and isolate the Naqoura area and its surroundings, along a 9-kilometer stretch on the far southern coast, from the Lebanese interior, in parallel with attempts to advance on the Khiyam front, and mobilize in the central sector in preparation for an incursion into the interior of the city of Bint Jbeil.

The Israeli occupation army launched a new ground attack from the towns of Tyre Harfa and Shamaa, located south of Tyre, to the west in an attempt to reach the seashore at the point of Bayada, a path of 5 kilometers. Lebanese sources following the military operations taking place in the south said that the attack did not succeed in reaching the hill overlooking the coastal road known as the Tyre-Naqoura road, adding that the Israeli forces were exposed to a barrage of anti-tank missiles, which resulted in the burning of 3 tanks, one of which was in the vicinity of the site of the Italian battalion affiliated with UNIFIL in the town of Shamaa.

The sources said that reaching the sea point "will mean that the Israeli army will tighten the noose around the party fighters who are still in the interior forests east of Naqoura between Hamoul and Labbouneh." They pointed out that the Israeli army "is combing the front on both sides starting from its advance positions," referring to combing the southern side located in Hamoul and the valleys extending to the border, and the second from the direction of Zebqin, Qleileh, Majdal Zun and Beyout al-Siyad, reaching east towards the Yatar forests and the mountains of al-Batm.

The sources said that the Israeli artillery "did not stop shelling the Lebanese interior with incendiary shells, and targeted the mountains of Batm, Majdal Zun, and Zebqin, reaching Al-Bazouriyeh inside Lebanese territory," which was confirmed by the official "National News Agency", which spoke of shelling with phosphorous the outskirts of Zebqin, Al-Qalila, and Majdal Zun, in an attempt to advance towards Al-Bayada.

Hezbollah, for its part, announced that its fighters had shelled a gathering of Israeli army forces on the southern outskirts of the town of Shama with artillery shells. It also announced that another gathering on the southern outskirts of the town of Bayada had been shelled with a rocket salvo.

In the eastern sector, Israeli forces renewed attempts to penetrate the border town of Khiyam from the eastern and southern sides. Al-Manar TV, the mouthpiece of Hezbollah, reported “the intensification of air strikes and the continuation of artillery shelling on the center and outskirts of the southern and eastern outskirts of Khiyam city,” noting that “the sounds of machine guns in the southern and eastern outskirts confirm that no breakthrough has been achieved in the targeted center for 72 hours,” adding that fighters are facing attempts to penetrate into the city, in addition to “rocket attacks from outside the city on Israeli support and reinforcement movements coming from Wazzani, Ain Arab, and Mazraat Sarda.”

While Khiyam was subjected to phosphorous artillery shelling and airstrikes, Hezbollah announced that it had targeted Israeli gatherings at the Al-Omra Gate on the southern outskirts of Khiyam City, and on its eastern outskirts, with rocket salvos.

After taking control of the border strip on the villages of Al-Hafa, the Israeli army spokesman, Avichay Adraee, appeared on a media tour in the south, and said that he took pictures of himself in the towns of Adaisseh and Kfar Kila in southern Lebanon.

At the same time, Hezbollah announced that it had targeted gatherings of Israeli soldiers on the southern and northern outskirts of the town of Maroun al-Ras, three times during Tuesday.

Rocket attack

In addition, Israeli raids continued deep inside Lebanon, and Hezbollah continued to launch rockets towards the Israeli interior.

The party said that its fighters launched “an air attack with a squadron of suicide drones on the Ramat David base (a major air base in the north that includes combat squadrons) 50 km from the Lebanese border, southeast of the city of Haifa.” It also indicated that its fighters launched “an air attack with a squadron of suicide drones on the Beit Lid base (a military base that includes training camps for the Nahal and Paratroopers Brigades) 90 km from the Lebanese border, east of the city of Netanya.”

He also said that his fighters targeted the "Glilot" base (headquarters of Military Intelligence Unit 8200) 110 km from the Lebanese border, on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, with a salvo of high-quality missiles. He announced the targeting of 5 border settlements in the north, and the downing of a "Hermes 450" reconnaissance plane and another aircraft.

In contrast, the Israeli army announced in a statement that it had "eliminated the commander of the medium-range missile system belonging to the Hezbollah organization."

He stated in a statement that “Air Force warplanes carried out an attack on Monday in Kfarjouz in southern Lebanon, under the direction of the Military Intelligence Service and the Northern Region Command, and eliminated the commander of Hezbollah’s medium-range missile system, Ali Tawfiq Duwaik.”

The statement added that Dweik "had been in charge of the medium-range missile system since September 2024, succeeding the previous commander of the system who was eliminated, and was responsible for launching more than 300 missiles towards the territory of the State of Israel, including the Haifa area and the center of the country."

At least 4 citizens were killed, and others were injured and missing, Tuesday evening, in an Israeli occupation bombing of the Al-Bureij and Al-Nuseirat camps in the Gaza Strip.

The occupation aircraft targeted a residential area in Al-Bureij camp in the central Gaza Strip, which led to the martyrdom of three citizens.

At least one citizen was killed and others were injured when the occupation forces bombed the Abu Jalala family home in the Nuseirat camp in the central Gaza Strip.

Citizens were also able to retrieve a martyr and body parts, in addition to a number of injuries that were transferred to the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in the neighboring city of Deir al-Balah, while the fate of citizens missing under the rubble remains unknown.

The occupation forces continue their aggression on the Gaza Strip, by land, sea and air, since October 7, 2023, which resulted in the martyrdom of 43,972 citizens, the majority of whom are women and children, and the injury of 104,008 others, in an incomplete toll, as thousands of victims are still under the rubble and on the roads, and ambulance and civil defense crews cannot reach them.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, upon arriving in Rio de Janeiro on Sunday for the 19th G20 Summit, expressed his willingness to work with all parties to realize a multipolar world based on equality and order, and inclusive economic globalization that benefits all.

In a written statement, Xi expressed hope that the G20 will play a greater role as an important platform for international economic cooperation.

This year’s G20 Leaders’ Summit, scheduled for November 18-19, is the first meeting of its kind since the African Union joined the group as a full member, a historic event that strengthens the voice of the Global South.

Javier Miranda, former president of Uruguay's Broad Front party, expressed hope that this summit would be a major step towards building a multipolar world - a world that promotes dialogue.

In remarks to Xinhua, Miranda said that in a world plagued by wars and conflicts, commitment to dialogue is one of the goals of this G20 meeting.

As president of the G20, Brazil has set the theme of the summit as “Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet.” Among the main priorities identified by the Brazilian government are combating hunger, poverty and inequality, promoting sustainable development, and advancing reforms in global governance.

"Building a just world requires the G20 to adhere to the principles of mutual respect, equal cooperation and mutual benefit, as well as support countries of the global south in achieving greater development," Xi said in a signed article published in Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo on Sunday.

“Building a sustainable planet requires the G20 to promote sustainable production and sustainable lifestyles as a means of achieving harmony between people and nature,” he added.

The Chinese president also pledged China's active support for the "Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty" initiative proposed by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

“As we gather at the G20 to discuss critical global issues such as governance, hunger, sustainability and the environment, we recognize the critical role of our partnership with China,” said Rodrigo Castro, Deputy Secretary of Major Events and Promotions for the Rio de Janeiro State Government.

Castro added that many solutions to the challenges facing developing countries stem from ideas and practices already implemented by China.

"For us Brazilians who are hosting the G20... we feel very proud to receive the Chinese president and the entire Chinese delegation," he continued.

In addition to attending the G20 summit, Xi will also pay a state visit to Brazil, which this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries.

During the visit, Xi will have an in-depth exchange of views with the Brazilian president on bilateral relations and international and regional issues of common concern.

Brazil is the second leg of Xi's two-nation tour, which also began with Peru. In Lima, Xi had a busy schedule, attending the 31st APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, paying a state visit to Peru, and holding a series of bilateral meetings, including a meeting with his U.S. counterpart, Joe Biden, on the sidelines of the APEC meeting.

In a momentous meeting on Saturday, Chinese President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart Joe Biden reaffirmed their commitment to maintaining dialogue, enhancing cooperation and avoiding conflict.

In recent years, relations between China and the United States have been through ups and downs. In Washington, the widespread zero-sum mentality against China has turned into policies to thwart the Asian country’s development.

"There is a bipartisan consensus (in Washington) that strategic competition with China must continue, even if there is little agreement on America's ultimate goal for this strategy," Yilong Zhang, associate research fellow and director of the trade and technology program at the Institute for China-US Studies, said in a written statement to Xinhua.

From tariffs to restrictions on semiconductor technology, these measures have not only weakened bilateral relations but have reverberated across global supply chains.

At the same time, China and the United States hold divergent worldviews. China has championed a vision of a more equitable, sustainable, and inclusive global society, while Washington has sought to maintain its long-standing hegemonic status.

Despite these deep differences, Saturday's high-level engagement underscored a shared understanding: With the stakes so high, neither side can afford to risk confrontation.

Xi said during the meeting that the two sides should continue to explore the right path to achieve good consensus between the two major countries and achieve long-term and peaceful coexistence on this planet.

"The Thucydides Trap is not a historical inevitability. A new Cold War should not be fought and cannot be won," the Chinese president said during the meeting, which took place on the sidelines of the 31st Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Economic Leaders' Meeting in Lima, Peru.

Chinese President Xi Jinping meets with U.S. President Joe Biden in Lima, Peru, Nov. 16, 2024. (Xinhua)

In recent years, some politicians, academics, and media outlets in the United States have clung to a zero-sum mentality, warning of the so-called "Thucydides Trap" -- the idea that an emerging state inevitably raises concerns in an established state, leading to conflict or war.

However, China has consistently rejected this premise. In a globalized world where nations are deeply interconnected and their interests are intricately intertwined, China believes that the old models of power politics and survival of the fittest must yield to a more cooperative vision that seeks to build a community with a shared future for mankind.

“The United States can save itself the high costs of fighting China on key issues by taking a win-win approach,” said Dennis Simon, a veteran expert on U.S.-China relations and former executive vice chancellor at Duke Kunshan University.

“Mutual respect, increased sensitivity to multiculturalism, and enhanced reciprocity can lead to win-win outcomes,” Simon added.

At the meeting on Saturday, Xi called on the US side to have a correct strategic conception of China and treat each other as equals.

Xi stressed that China's goal of establishing stable, healthy and sustainable China-US relations has not changed, adding that its commitment to mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation as principles in handling China-US relations has not changed.

For his part, Biden stressed that the relationship between the United States and China is the most important bilateral relationship in the world.

Biden said the United States does not seek a new Cold War, does not seek to change China's regime, does not seek to direct its alliances against China, does not support "Taiwan independence," has no intention of entering into conflict with China, and does not view its Taiwan policy as a means of competing with China.

Over the past four years, the two presidents have jointly put China-US dialogue and cooperation back on track. More than 20 communication mechanisms have been resumed or established, and positive achievements have been made in such areas as diplomacy, security, economy and trade, finance and finance, military, anti-drug and law enforcement, agriculture, climate change, and people-to-people exchanges.

"The urgent need now is to maintain, strengthen and consolidate communication between the two countries," Zhang said.

"As the political dust settles from this election cycle, people-to-people exchanges will be as important as diplomatic exchanges," he added, referring to the just-ended US presidential election, in which former US President Donald Trump won the race.

"The next generation must continue to engage with each other, not only to reduce misunderstandings but also to deepen the pool of expertise on China affairs within the United States," he added.

During his first term, the Trump administration embraced an “America First” doctrine that saw sweeping tariffs imposed on U.S. trading partners. Following his victory, concerns about increased protectionism have once again spread globally.

“We hope that China will continue to defend the message of keeping the global trading system open,” said Carlos Aquino, director of the Center for Asian Studies at the National University of San Marcos in Peru.

"It is important for President Xi to continue to uphold the message of (protecting) a free and open trading system," he added.

Israel welcomed on Tuesday the European Union's decision to expand its sanctions on Iran, during a meeting of foreign ministers yesterday in Brussels to discuss regional and international issues.

“I welcome the decision yesterday by the EU foreign ministers to impose tough sanctions on the Iranian regime,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said in a post on the X platform.

He believed that "these sanctions will harm Iran's missile and drone production operations, make it difficult to distribute Iranian weapons by ship to combat zones, and increase economic pressure on the Iranian regime."

Sa'ar considered that "these are necessary steps in the international community's war against the Iranian threat, which poses the greatest danger to the security and stability of the Middle East, Europe and the entire world," he claimed.

Yesterday, Monday, the European Union Commission announced the expansion of its sanctions imposed on Iran to include a ban on the export of equipment used in the production of missiles and drones.

The Commission explained that it had included an Iranian person and an institution on the sanctions list due to "military support to Russia and armed groups and organizations in the Middle East and the Red Sea region."

She added that accordingly, "the export, transfer, supply or sale of equipment used in the development and production of missiles and drones from the European Union to Iran has been prohibited."

The sanctions also include any transactions with ports owned, operated or controlled by persons and entities listed on the sanctions list.

On October 14, the European Union decided to impose sanctions on some individuals and organizations in Iran, including airlines, on the grounds of transferring drones and missiles from Iran to Russia.

Four citizens were injured by Israeli occupation forces' bullets this afternoon, Tuesday, in Jenin camp, during its ongoing aggression on the camp and the city since the early hours of today.

The Palestinian Red Crescent Society said that its crews dealt with an injury to a citizen in the thigh area, and 3 others with shrapnel from a bomb launched by a drone towards citizens in the eastern neighborhood of Jenin.

The occupation forces burned 3 houses inside the camp, and a commercial store at the entrance to the camp, which was completely engulfed in flames, before the civil defense crews were able to extinguish the fire.

Civil defense crews reached two houses in the camp, while the occupation forces prevented them from reaching the third house and dealing with the fire there.

The occupation forces cut off electricity and some water lines inside the camp's neighborhoods after bulldozing the streets and infrastructure.

The government has renewed its rejection of Israeli deductions from Palestinian tax revenues, including a recent court decision to make new deductions for Jewish families, claiming that members of them were killed in attacks in the West Bank.

Director of the Government Communications Office, Muhammad Abu al-Rab, said that these deductions are “illegal and part of the comprehensive war on our people, in Gaza and the West Bank, including Jerusalem, and aim to undermine the work of Palestinian institutions, especially with the accumulation of these deductions to exceed 7.5 billion shekels since 2019.”

Since February 2019, the occupation government has begun deducting about 53 million shekels per month from Palestinian clearance funds, claiming that they are equivalent to the Palestinian government’s payments to the families of martyrs, wounded and prisoners. Since October 2023, it has added to this the deduction of about 275 million shekels equivalent to the government’s expenses in the Gaza Strip, then a new law was enacted in the Knesset last June with new deductions under the item of compensating the families of individuals killed or injured in attacks carried out by Palestinians.

Abu al-Rub said: "This law came to complete the seizure of Palestinian tax funds once and for all," stressing that the government is continuing its efforts and international contacts to pressure the Israeli government to release the frozen Palestinian funds.

He added: There is understanding from many countries of the Palestinian position, including European countries, and there is pressure already being exerted on the Israeli government, and we hope for a quick breakthrough in this file.

The occupation court in Jerusalem had ruled that the Palestinian National Authority and four Palestinian detainees must pay financial compensation to three families of Israeli settlers whose sons were killed in a shooting attack in 2001 near Ramallah.

Israeli media reported that the decision was taken on November 17, during the final hearing of the case filed by the families of the slain settlers.

According to the decision, 62 million shekels ($18 million) will be paid to the families of the three settlers, of which 24.8 million (about $7 million) will be paid by the Authority, 37.2 million shekels will be paid by the four detainees, and the remaining amount will be paid by the defendants (the Authority and the prisoners) for legal expenses and lawyers’ fees.

Today, Tuesday, Israeli occupation bulldozers demolished two rooms and uprooted dozens of trees in the New Nablus area.

Local sources reported that the occupation forces, accompanied by a bulldozer, stormed a land belonging to citizen Hamza Al-Hamami in the New Nablus area, with an area of 500 square meters, and demolished two rooms and uprooted 42 fruit trees, beehives, walls and stone chains, under the pretext of building without a permit.

She pointed out that Al-Hamami had built the two rooms on his land since 2014, and was using it as a summer resort for his family, but the occupation handed him a notice to stop construction at the beginning of the war on the Gaza Strip, and a second notice seven days ago to stop construction, under the pretext of building in Area C, classified according to the Oslo Accords.

Two Lebanese citizens were martyred today, Tuesday, in an Israeli airstrike on the Shiyah area in the southern suburbs of Beirut, amid widespread destruction of buildings, facilities and infrastructure.

The occupation aircraft and artillery bombed the city of Tyre and the towns of Deir Amas, Mazraat Mashraf, Ansariyah, Al-Bissariyeh, Al-Bayada, Adloun, Al-Khiam, Deir Qanoun, Ras Al-Ain, Al-Bazouriyeh, Barish, Maaroub, Al-Rayhan, Kounin, Hanin, Al-Sawana, Al-Samaiyeh, Al-Jumaijmeh, Shaqra, Majdal Salm, Labaya, Zalaya, Al-Ghandouriyah, Shama, Yahmar Al-Shaqif, Deir Mimas, Ainatha, Shebaa, Al-Qalaa, Al-Tayri, Hanin, Beit Yahoun, Qabrikha, and Barashit in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa.

A young man was injured on Tuesday afternoon after the Israeli occupation forces opened fire on him in front of the military checkpoint at the Shuafat camp, north of occupied Jerusalem.

Video clips showed the young man lying on the ground covered in blood, without knowing his identity or health condition.

The occupation forces closed the military checkpoint, prevented the movement of citizens through it, and stormed the Shuafat camp.

The Ministry of Health in Gaza announced today, Tuesday, that the death toll in the Gaza Strip has risen to 43,972, the majority of whom are children and women, since the start of the Israeli occupation aggression on October 7, 2023.

The ministry added in a brief statement that the number of injuries has risen to 104,008 since the start of the aggression, while thousands of victims are still under the rubble.

She pointed out that the occupation forces committed 3 massacres, which resulted in the death of 50 citizens and the injury of 110 others.

Today, Tuesday, the Israeli occupation forces demolished a mosque in the town of Jabal al-Mukaber in occupied Jerusalem.

The occupation forces stormed the town with military reinforcements, surrounded the Al-Shiyah Mosque, and imposed a cordon around it, before starting the demolition process.

About two weeks ago, the occupation municipality in Jerusalem delivered a final notice to demolish the mosque, which was built twenty years ago on an area estimated at 80 square meters, and consists of one floor and an external courtyard.

With the continued bleeding of dignity and honor, and the war of pride that bleeding Gaza is confronting, and amidst the massacres of genocide committed by Israel and its criminal army, the language of diplomacy emerges in an attempt to beautify the Israeli aggression, by proposing initiatives and deals that Israel rejects time and time again, to prove to the world that it is a stumbling block on the path to ending the war, whether in the south or the north (Gaza and Lebanon), and all of that was clear in Netanyahu’s miserable statements that he repeated yesterday, using as usual his no’s and claims that have become like a broken record, that the Israeli street has grown tired of listening to for more than a year.

What did Netanyahu say? And what lies behind his miserable speech, as he repeats from every platform that the efforts to return the kidnapped soldiers have not stopped even for a moment, claiming that Hamas is the obstacle to completing an exchange deal, and that it rejects negotiations, in response to the recommendations of the senior leaders of his security apparatus from the Shin Bet, Mossad and the General Staff, that Israel must show flexibility if it wants to reach an exchange deal?

Netanyahu said (No to Hamas, no to the Palestinian Authority, no to ending the war, no to withdrawing the army from Gaza, no to a swap deal, and no to the United States, which threatened to stop supplying us with weapons if we entered Rafah), and he says: We entered it without looking back.

Netanyahu's renewed voice against Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran was not a coincidence, but rather the real motives behind this Israeli war, which seeks to establish a new status quo in the Middle East with American support, under the pretext of eliminating the resistance, activists and the Iranian axis of evil, as Netanyahu claims.

The most eloquent responses to Netanyahu came from within Israel. Opposition leader Yair Lapid is the one who set the record straight and crossed the i’s when he declared last night that the prime minister does not believe in his supreme duty to return the kidnapped soldiers, and that he is not prepared to sacrifice government seats for their return. He explained that Netanyahu is not worthy of the trust of the Israelis, and that he supports the clown Ben Gvir on electronic platforms, concluding that Netanyahu does not want a deal for political reasons.

Netanyahu's goals are becoming clearer day after day, as he lays out justifications to continue the aggression on the Gaza Strip. It seems that his recent threats against the leadership of Gaza and its replacement provide more justifications for committing massacres, as these statements give his army the green light to continue the war and aggression, according to what Netanyahu announced from the platform of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Security Committee, when he said that the war will not end, that the army will not withdraw, and that it will continue to control the main axes in the Gaza Strip. He is also seeking to scatter the papers of the imminent agreement with Lebanon through new conditions that he has set, including freedom of military action for Israel in Lebanon, and monitoring the Syrian-Lebanese border. He realizes that Hezbollah will reject these conditions, and all of this is because Netanyahu and his right-wing clique are seeking to prolong the war.

Netanyahu did not achieve the goals he announced at the beginning of the war, and hence he repeatedly appears to blame Hamas and the resistance, trying to direct his speech that appears miserable, but the Israeli street, which no longer needs additional evidence, is well aware that Netanyahu is the first and last person responsible for obstructing all efforts and endeavors aimed at reaching agreements, and that the war will continue without achieving the goal of returning the detainees, because that is not considered a basic goal for Netanyahu, who considers that his highest goals are to remain in his position and maintain the existence of the ruling far-right coalition, in order to continue the war of revenge against the Palestinian people.

If Hezbollah agrees to the American paper "Amos Hochstein", Netanyahu's Israel will not agree to it, and this is what happened with the paper that Hamas agreed to regarding Gaza last July. Netanyahu's journey in Lebanon, which has barely begun yet, is a long, complex and ambitious journey, at the very least for him to seize the south of the Litani and establish settlements there.

Before Hezbollah agrees to this malicious paper, it must change its name from Hezbollah to any other name, or to any party other than Hezbollah; the party of Muhammad, Ali, or Hussein, because it is not permissible to change its combat doctrine, which is based on a divine doctrine, from one extreme to the other. Here we mean the issue of abandoning Gaza and supporting it and evading linking its agreement to cease fire to a ceasefire on it. It is true that its Secretary-General, who announced this more than once, was assassinated, but aren’t there those who still believe in him, his principles, and his positions, so that he and them can be abandoned with such simplicity and smoothness? This, after such a short time since his martyrdom – less than two months – is tantamount to shedding Nasrallah’s blood again, especially since he has not yet been buried.

The party's division is one of the goals of the American-Israeli card, which will drag with it two other divisions, the first with the allied Amal Movement led by Nabih Berri, who seems to be encouraged to identify with it, especially in the issue of separating the arenas, especially the Palestinian arena, for old reasons dating back to the days of the civil war about fifty years ago. As for the second division, it will be with the axis of resistance in Gaza, Yemen and Iraq, which is the axis that the party formed after great effort and a long time, and even stood at its head as its leader and manager. It is no secret that this axis has put in its urgent practical calculations the land of the West Bank, especially the northern regions through the resistance factions, including the Fatah-affiliated Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Today, the West Bank faces a grave danger represented by its annexation to Israel, which was officially announced as soon as Trump arrived at the White House in two months from now, and actual preparations have begun to do so. It is true that the official Palestinian counter-preparations have not gone beyond some statements, but the essence of the position is still betting on America, including the administration hostile to everything Palestinian headed by Donald Trump and his son-in-law of Lebanese origin, Massad Boulos.

There is no single reason that would make Hezbollah agree to such a malicious card, except that it was defeated in this confrontation, but even the defeat of a resistance party in one of the many confrontations makes it withdraw "quietly", as they say, and rebuild its identity anew. Accordingly, there is one case that makes us understand the party's approval of the card; a superficial, formal approval, reflecting a comprehensive and categorical rejection of principle, inspired by what Netanyahu did with Hamas during the past year in Gaza, and with the Palestinian Authority regarding the independent state during the past thirty years.

After the appointments made by President-elect Donald Trump, it has become clear that the worst that we and others warned about is coming with force.

The worst means resuming normalization and integrating Israel into the region at the expense of the Palestinian cause, continuing the genocide and displacement in the Gaza Strip, working to re-engineer the Strip geographically and humanely, and crystallizing a Palestinian administration under actual occupation and Israeli control with apparent Arab, regional, and international supervision, in addition to continuing the gradual nibbling, creeping annexation, and joint aggression between the occupation army and armed settler groups on the West Bank.

In addition to this, the revival of the Deal of the Century or a worse version of it, where the reference to the Palestinian state is deleted (or not deleted). However, with a guarantee that it does not possess the components of a state except in name, while the settlements, settlement blocs, and the Jordan Valley are cut off from it, and control over water sources, vital, strategic, and archaeological sites, and nature reserves is taken away; that is, all or most of the areas classified as (C), which constitute more than 60% of the area of the West Bank, in addition to the deportation of hundreds of thousands of our people inside to the lands of the future state, as stated in the text of the Trump deal.

The essential and fateful question: Is the success of this plan inevitable and inevitable, and that all that can be done is to fall under it, or coexist with it and seek to obtain crumbs under the name of improving the standard of living of the Palestinians?

Or is there another option based on the fact that annexing the West Bank or large parts of it and displacing millions of Palestinians is not an easy goal to achieve? For the simple reason that most of the 15 million Palestinians around the world will reject this fate, and half of them are steadfast and clinging to their homeland, and are ready to continue the struggle and resistance in all forms and to make the most precious sacrifices no matter how long it takes, as has been proven since the emergence of the Palestinian cause until now, because they believe that they are right and that they have a message, and that their cause is just and morally superior and enjoys broad support from world public opinion and most countries of the world, especially in the East and South.

Even if we assume for the sake of argument that the occupying state has annexed Area C or large parts of it, and that the Trump administration has blessed this step as it did during his first term in office, through the Trump deal, recognition of the annexation of Jerusalem, the transfer of the US embassy to it, and the rest of the known steps it has taken, this will not be the end of the road. Rather, the resistance will continue, and the annexation will be illegitimate and illegal, just as colonial settlement, occupation, and apartheid are illegitimate and illegal. This will open the doors of conflict in the region wide open, because the American-Zionist plan includes fueling the conflict between Arab countries, especially in the Arabian Gulf, and Iran, and milking Arab wealth through arms purchase deals and lowering oil prices, in addition to tightening the region’s economies more closely to the American and Western economies.

These American-Israeli steps will also, at the appropriate time, open the doors to the displacement of millions of Palestinians to the surrounding countries, especially Egypt and Jordan, and this constitutes a threat to the security and stability of these countries, and to the normalization of relations between the occupying state and the Arab and Islamic countries, and the integration of Israel into the region and making it a central, dominant state, and this inflicts the most serious damage to the interests, goals and rights of the peoples and countries of the Arab region, and the Middle East as a whole.

The dilemma we face is that some influential Palestinians and Arabs believe that they have no choice but to wait and see what we will do after Trump’s policy becomes clear, or else to engage in the scheme, due to the lack of the ability to confront it, and under the pretext of saving what can be saved, and obtaining the crumbs that they see as better than nothing.

Some of these people go too far, wanting to convince themselves or mislead others that there is a new Trump who is different from the old Trump, because he is stronger after winning the popular vote and the Electoral College, and after his party obtained the majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives, and in light of his control over the Supreme Court, and because he does not need the votes of the Zionist pressure groups because he will not run again, or that he will take revenge on Netanyahu due to his betrayal of him and congratulating Biden... etc.

They repeat these nonsense despite the fact that the appointments made by Trump do not leave room for error in assessments, and that he will continue with his previous policy, perhaps in a worse way and more quickly if he does not find someone to stop him, and through the emergence of sufficient indicators that he will lose if he returns to liquidating the Palestinian cause, he, despite his doctrine, connections and madness, believes in making profitable deals and avoiding losses away from institutions, values and ethics, and this requires taking immediate measures and determining a list of measures that will be taken by the Palestinians, Arabs, regionally, Europeans and internationally if the annexation is implemented, and this includes the occupying state, the United States and all those who stand with them.

The response begins with a correct diagnosis of the reality, challenges, risks and opportunities. The correct diagnosis is half the cure. There is a difference between seeing that the new Trump is bad and perhaps worse than the previous one, and those who consider him good and will stop the wars and solve the Palestinian issue with a fair or balanced solution.

The other required step is to put the Palestinian house in order, based on a realistic national program that embodies common denominators, and achieves unity of authority, political system and leadership, and the subordination of weapons and all forms of work and struggle to a single agreed-upon national strategy, and through the implementation of the Beijing Declaration, and focusing on stopping the genocide, relief, withdrawal and reconstruction, and opening a political horizon capable of ending the occupation and achieving independence, because stopping the aggression alone, despite its importance, without reconstruction opens the doors to displacement that will take the name of immigration.

It is not the way to escape to say that the Palestinian leadership has chosen a policy of waiting and distancing itself to avoid genocide, and that it will not put its head under the guillotine alongside Hamas’s head. The plan to liquidate the Palestinian cause began before October 7 and will continue after it if the requirements to thwart it are not available. Therefore, we see the leadership evading completing the end of the division and restoring unity, and aiming through internal communications and meetings to convince Hamas to give up everything, even any real participation from above or under the table; this is by not participating in the national consensus government, which is a matter of national consensus, nor in anything, including the formation of the administrative committee or the community support committee, which is supposed to be formed by President Mahmoud Abbas alone by presidential decree and its reference and budget are from the disputed government, without activating the temporary leadership framework on the path to rebuilding the institutions of the PLO, and even without compensation or the approval of the occupying state or guaranteeing Washington’s approval, especially the new Trump administration.

There is absolutely no need to form an administrative committee or community support, but forming it before or without forming a national unity government is a grave mistake, as it creates a governmental framework separate from the authority after the president issues a decree regarding it, and it is intended to be an alternative to Hamas and Abbas and under Arab, regional and international supervision (guardianship) and under Israeli control.

The policy of disassociation and not giving priority to achieving unity will not save the leadership, will not preserve power, will not prevent the revival of the Trump deal, and will not prevent the annexation and even the coming genocide and displacement in the West Bank if the plan is successful. Rather, it will help the leadership achieve it quickly and at the lowest cost.

The Palestinian role required of the current leadership, American and Israeli, is that of the male bee; that is, pollination and then getting rid of it. The Authority is not wanted to return to Gaza, nor is there a single authority in the West Bank, nor does it want to lead a state, because the Israelis do not want any embodiment of a single national identity that keeps the road to establishing a Palestinian state open.

Steps required to confront Trump and Israel:

First: Withdraw recognition of the occupying state that does not recognize any Palestinian rights and is committing genocide in Gaza and creeping annexation and gradual extermination in the West Bank, within a real unity based on a new comprehensive approach that includes changing the balance of power to pave the way for a political process that is radically different from the previous one, and begin forming a unified Palestinian delegation to negotiate the cessation of aggression, the prisoner exchange deal, and everything else. This is a war on all Palestinians, and Hamas should not negotiate alone. This will reduce the pressure on Hamas and strengthen the Palestinian negotiating position. If any party fails to do so, unity and joint action must begin between all those who believe that unity is a necessity and the law of victory for any national liberation movement.

Second: Building a comprehensive Arab position that defends Palestinian and Arab rights, especially the Saudi role, because the focus will be on dragging Riyadh into normalization, and blocking the path to integrating Israel into the region by skipping the Palestinian issue. If this happens - that is, integrating Israel - it will dwarf Saudi Arabia, fragment the Arabs even more, and cause the most serious damage to Arab interests and rights.

This common Arab position is based on the fact that a new world is advancing, albeit slowly, and an old world is collapsing, and that the Arab countries, especially the Gulf countries, are now in a better position, and that they have economic relations with China, Russia, and Iran that are much greater than their relations with America.

Third: Building an alliance, or at least good neighborly relations and Arab-Iranian-Turkish cooperation, to block the blackmail of the Gulf states and milk their wealth, under the pretext of protecting them from the Iranian threat that portrays Tehran as an enemy of the Arabs, by continuing the path of improving Saudi-Arab-Iranian relations that began with the Beijing Declaration in March 2023. Perhaps the improvement in relations between a number of Arab countries and Iran, and what was stated in the statement of the recent Arab-Islamic summit regarding condemning the aggression against Iran, and the readiness, as reported in the news, for a joint Iranian-Saudi military maneuver are indications of this path.

Fourth: Establishing a global alliance that includes Europe, China, Russia, and the countries of the South, which will all be harmed by Trump’s “America First” policy, as well as all supporters of the Palestinian cause, in order to end the occupation and achieve the independence of the State of Palestine on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital, as a step towards a radical and historic solution that achieves justice. A comprehensive solution to all dimensions of the Palestinian cause, based on defeating the colonial-settler project and dismantling the apartheid system.

Let us begin taking the necessary steps immediately, and determine and prepare to take the necessary steps if the Trump deal is re-introduced, or if the genocidal war continues and annexation is implemented, and we ask the Arabs, the region, Europe and the world to follow suit.