Today, Sunday, Chairman of the National Security Committee, Member of the Knesset, Brigadier General Zvika Vogel, did not rule out the presence of traitors from within behind the Hamas attack last October 7 on the settlements surrounding the Gaza Strip.

Fogel, who is from the Otzma Yehudit party (Jewish Force), said in statements to the Hebrew newspaper Maariv, “Does it occur to you that for the past twenty years we did not know what was happening in the Gaza Strip? "Someone here knew what was going to happen."

He added, "I am saying that there is something that, if we do not discover it in the future, we may deepen the gap we are in between the possibility of a conspiracy and the possibility that we are all stupid. I prefer to think that we are not stupid."

He continued, “We cannot know anything, nothing.” We got into the car of the nuclear scientist in Iran and killed him. We do not know what is happening in the sector. It is something much worse, and someone must investigate it.”

Vogel said, “When the head of the Shin Bet (Ronen Bar) says that an investigation committee must be formed, I understand that there are many parties that have begun to worry about themselves instead of the future of the country.”

He added, "There is something stinking here. I want someone to discover it. It cannot be just a perception."

He continued, "If this is not true, we will have to change entire units in the army and generations of leaders who were not wrong in their perception. They are simply irresponsible and unprofessional, and they have sinned against the State of Israel."

He added, “I prefer not to think that, and I prefer to think that someone betrayed us from within.”

He continued, "Perhaps we will have to discover this truth in the future. I do not know which is better, to discover that there were traitors here or that there is a group of unprofessional people."

Vogel concluded his statements by saying, “I cannot rule out that there is a conspiracy here. We cannot be so irresponsible. I hope I am wrong.”

On the seventh of last October, Hamas launched an attack on Israeli military points and settlements around the Gaza Strip, during which it killed about 1,200 Israelis, wounded more than 5,430, and captured at least 239. It exchanged dozens of them with Israel during a temporary humanitarian truce that lasted 7 days and ended early. December 2023.

For 114 days, the Israeli occupation army has been waging a devastating war on the Gaza Strip, leaving 26,422 dead and 65,087 injured, 70% of whom are children and women, and causing massive destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe.

Source: Anatolia

CIA Director William J. Burns is meeting this weekend in Paris with the Qatari Prime Minister and negotiators from the Egyptian and Israeli intelligence agencies. The objective is to reach an agreement allowing the release of the hostages and the cessation, at least temporarily, of the fighting.

A six-week pause in the war waged by Israel in the Gaza Strip, the immediate release of children, women and elderly people still detained by Hamas, that of a significant number of Palestinians present in Israeli prisons, a increased humanitarian aid to the Gazan population: these are the terms of the agreement currently being discussed.

“The following phases would see Hamas release the Israeli soldiers, starting with the women, and finally the return of the remains of deceased hostages,” specifies The Wall Street Journal, according to information collected from American mediators. “In exchange, Hamas would obtain guarantees, notably from the United States, regarding a comprehensive agreement leading to an end to the war that has engulfed Gaza since Hamas militants attacked southern Israel. October 7.”

Friday January 26, Jo Biden spoke by telephone with the Egyptian and Qatari leaders, who act as intermediaries with Hamas, reports The New York Times. This Sunday, CIA Director William J. Burns will stop in Paris to meet with Israeli, Egyptian and Qatari officials. “If Mr. Burns makes enough progress, Jo Biden could send his Middle East coordinator, Brett McGurk, to the region to finalize the deal” in the next two weeks.

Towards an extended break?

Last week, remarks by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, implicating Qatar's leaders added fuel to the fire, but the dispute “did not appear to deter American efforts to end to the war in Gaza,” notes the Wall Street Journal. The daily believes that the contribution of the CIA director should give new impetus to the negotiations and recalls that William J. Burns has already shown himself to be a key negotiator during the truce negotiated between Israel and Hamas last November.

The permanent ceasefire demanded by Hamas for the release of all the hostages is, however, not on the agenda, underlines the Israeli daily Ha'Aretz. “Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip want a complete ceasefire (which would protect it against future Israeli score-settling), while Israel wants a simple pause after which fighting could resume.”

A point on which there are nevertheless certain differences between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the IDF General Staff, notes the newspaper. “The generals realize that there remains only a relatively narrow window of opportunity to bring most of the hostages home alive. If an agreement is reached, the army does not rule out a long pause which would allow its forces to reorganize.”

In Khan Younes, Israeli troops underground

In the meantime, on the ground, the Israeli army has increased pressure in recent days on the south of the Gaza Strip. The city of Khan Younes is now completely surrounded and while tens of thousands of residents have had to flee using passages set up by the Israeli army, the fighting has intensified in the western part of the city.

There is a clear change in the nature of the war, explains Ha'Aretz. While there was no question, until now, of sending Israeli soldiers to fight inside the tunnels set up by Hamas, special units and engineering soldiers now patrol certain tunnels.

“In Khan Yunis, not only does the IDF face the challenge of an urban war more intense than anything Western armies have faced, but it is a war that is now also taking place underground.”

The Israeli authorities seized about 154 dunums of land in Derastiya and Haris, in Salfit Governorate.

Anti-settlement activist Nazmi Al-Salman reported on Sunday that Israeli authorities announced the seizure of 154 dunums and 127 square meters of land from the town of Derastiya in the area called “Al-Shaftan,” and from the lands of the village of Haris in the area called “Al-Bureij,” to the west of the “Refafa” settlement “Established on citizens’ lands.

A number of citizens were killed and dozens injured, Sunday evening, as a result of Israeli artillery shelling of a school housing displaced people west of Khan Yunis.

Medical sources reported that a number of displaced citizens were killed and dozens injured, after Israel army bombed a school housing displaced people in the Al-Amal neighborhood, west of Khan Yunis, in the southern Gaza Strip.

A number of citizens were also injured while waiting for aid to enter after the Israeli army targeted the Kuwait Roundabout in Gaza City, and a number of others were injured when the Israeli occupation aircraft bombed a house in the Nuseirat camp in the central Gaza Strip.

A large fire broke out due to Israeli artillery shelling around the castle towers in the Qaizan Rashwan area, south of Khan Yunis, in the southern Gaza Strip. The Israeli forces also burned residential homes in the southern neighborhood of Khan Yunis camp.

The Israeli army committed 19 massacres against families in the Gaza Strip, claiming 165 killed and 290 injuries during the past 24 hours. A number of victims are still under rubble and on the roads, and the occupation is preventing ambulance and civil defense crews from reaching them.

In an infinite toll, the number of dead and wounded since the start of the aggression on the Gaza Strip on the seventh of last October has risen to 26,422 killed and 65,087 wounded.

International newspapers and websites continue to follow the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip and its local and international repercussions, highlighting criticism directed at the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the repercussions of the International Court of Justice ruling.

A report on the Al-Monitor website predicted that Netanyahu would soon be forced to choose between returning the Israeli prisoners detained in Gaza and his extremist ministers who are holding him hostage - according to the report - in light of talk of an imminent deal, the details of which are being discussed.

The report said that the US administration will not forgive Netanyahu for any attempt to disrupt the talks or undermine its strategy in the region. Netanyahu will then not only find himself in a confrontation with the head of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Yahya Sinwar, but also with US President Joe Biden and Israel’s allies.

An article in the New York Times strongly criticized Netanyahu, and considered him an obstacle to the solutions proposed by the United States and some Arab countries, adding that his insistence on comprehensive victory in the war regardless of the consequences has become part of the problem.

As for the French "Le Monde", it said in its editorial that the International Court of Justice's recognition of the risk of Israel committing genocide in Gaza is a reminder that Israel's war on the Gaza Strip does not comply with the basic rules related to the protection of civilians.

yellow card

In turn, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz described the International Court of Justice ruling as a yellow card for Israel, and said that although the ruling did not include an order to stop the war, it was decisive, and everyone in Israel must take this strong warning seriously and adhere to its content.

In a related context, the French newspaper "Liberation" published a letter signed by dozens of experts in international law in which they criticized France's attack on South Africa's lawsuit against Israel.

The letter considered that Paris's description of the case as heinous puts it in a break with international law, and sends a message to the world that it despises international law.

In turn, Axios reported that the US President has recently faced sharp and rare criticism within Congress, due to the targeting of the Houthis in Yemen and other groups in the Middle East.

The website pointed to protests by lawmakers from both parties against the military force used by Biden in the Middle East, which ranged from raising legal concerns to calls for the necessity of involving lawmakers in decisions of this kind.

Today, Sunday, a settler shot a sheep shepherd in the village of Kisan, east of Bethlehem.

According to local sources, the security official from the “Ibi Hanahel” settlement, which is located on citizens’ lands, shot the citizen Yasser Musa Ghazal and his flock of sheep while he was in the Bir Kisan area, west of the village, without sustaining any injury.

The sources indicated that attacks on sheep herders have increased in the recent period, the most recent of which was the death of a number of sheep heads after rocks fell on them by settlers.

The New York Times quoted Israeli military and intelligence officials as saying that a large number of the weapons used by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the attacks of last October 7 came from an unexpected source, which is the Israeli army itself.

For years, analysts have pointed to underground smuggling routes to explain how Hamas remained so heavily armed despite Israel's military blockade of the Gaza Strip.

But recent intelligence information has shown the extent to which Hamas is able to build many of its missiles and anti-tank weapons from thousands of munitions that did not explode when Israel fired them into Gaza, according to Israeli and Western weapons and intelligence experts. The movement also arms its fighters with weapons taken from Israeli military bases.

Intelligence surveyed by The New York Times during months of fighting revealed that just as the Israeli authorities misjudged Hamas' intentions before October 7, they also underestimated its ability to obtain weapons.

The newspaper points out that what is clear now is that the same weapons that Israeli forces used to impose the siege on Gaza over the past 17 years are now being used against them.

It quoted Michael Kardash, former deputy head of the bomb disposal department in the Israeli National Police and an advisor to the Israeli police, saying, “Unexploded ordnance is the main source of explosives for Hamas.”

Weapons experts say that approximately 10% of munitions usually do not explode, but in the case of Israel the number may be higher. An Israeli intelligence officer - who spoke to the newspaper on the condition of anonymity - said that the failure rate of some of these missiles could reach 15 percent. %.

Israel's arsenal includes Vietnam-era missiles, which the United States and other military powers have long since discontinued.

Either way, years of intermittent bombardment and the recent shelling of Gaza have left thousands of tons of unexploded ordnance scattered in the area awaiting reuse, and a single 750-pound bomb that fails to explode can turn into hundreds of rockets.

Israeli officials knew before last October's attacks that Hamas was capable of making use of some Israeli-made weapons, but the scope astonished weapons experts and diplomats alike.

The Israeli authorities also knew that their weapons depots were vulnerable to theft.

A military report issued early last year indicated that thousands of bullets and hundreds of weapons and grenades had been seized by Hamas from poorly guarded bases.

The newspaper reported that after Hamas breached the border in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on October 7, 4 Israeli soldiers discovered the body of a Hamas gunman who was killed outside the Ra’im military base. One of the soldiers said that Hebrew writing was visible on a hand grenade on his belt, and he identified it as a bomb. A modern Israeli bulletproof device.

Other Hamas fighters also seized some weapons from the base and carried them to Gaza, Israeli military officials say.

The newspaper's report indicated that members of an Israeli forensic team collected one of the 5,000 rockets fired by Hamas that day, and by examining the rocket, they discovered that its military explosives most likely came from an unexploded Israeli rocket fired at Gaza during a previous war, according to an Israeli intelligence officer.

If the attacks of last October 7 showed the combined arsenal that Hamas had gathered together, as the newspaper says - which included Iranian-made attack drones and North Korean-made missile launchers, the types of weapons that Hamas is known to smuggle into Gaza through tunnels - Other weapons, such as anti-tank explosives, RPG warheads, thermobaric bombs, and explosive devices, have been repurposed as Israeli weapons, according to videos published by Hamas and remnants uncovered by Israel.

Rockets and missiles require huge amounts of explosive material, which officials say is the most difficult material to smuggle into Gaza.

The Palestinian presidency expressed its rejection of the unjust campaign led by the Israeli occupation government against the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), which aims to liquidate the Palestinian refugee issue, which contradicts UN Resolution (302), under which and for which UNRWA was established on December 18, 1949. And other UN resolutions related to the refugee issue.

The Presidency called on the countries that took a position on UNRWA before the end of the investigation into the accusations against it, to withdraw from these positions that would unfairly and inhumanely punish millions of our people, especially since they were displaced from their land in 1948, and Israel is still committing Crimes against them, the latest of which is the genocidal war in the Gaza Strip.

The Presidency praised the position of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and the positions of the countries that refused to comply with this Israeli-American project, which was expressed by officials in the Israeli government, that there will be no role for UNRWA, and this exposes the real goal of this campaign.

The presidency affirmed that the refugee issue is the core of the Palestinian issue, regarding which dozens of UN resolutions have been taken, stressing that there is no solution to the Palestinian issue except with the return of the refugees in accordance with Resolution 194.

BY RAZ SEGAL

On Friday, the International Court of Justice issued an interim ruling against Israel and its war in Gaza. In the case, brought by South Africa last month, the court ruled that it is plausible that Israel is perpetrating genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. This ruling marks an end to the era of Israeli impunity in the international legal system.

The judgment pointed to dozens of explicit statements of “intent to destroy” by Israeli state leaders, wartime Cabinet ministers and senior army officers as well as the unprecedented levels of killing and destruction. The court also issued provisional measures, recognizing the dire situation: more than 26,000 Palestinians killed and more than 64,000 wounded in Israel’s bombardment, as well as almost 2 million people forcibly displaced now facing famine and the spread of infectious diseases.

The provisional measures did not include an order for a cease-fire, which South Africa had requested, but they did instruct Israel — by an overwhelming majority vote of the ICJ judges of 15 to 2 — to prevent any acts of genocide in Gaza and ensure that its military does not perpetrate such acts.

As part of the court’s provisional measures, Israel must also prevent and punish incitement to genocide; ensure the provision of urgent aid to Gaza; prevent the destruction of evidence and ensure its preservation; and provide the court with a report on these measures within a month. In effect, these orders do require a cease-fire, for there is no other way to carry them out.

The International Court of Justice ruling stems from the United Nations’ genocide convention, which was created in December 1948 and based on the view that Nazism and what we now call the Holocaust were exceptional.

This served a purpose: It separated the Holocaust from the piles of bodies and destroyed cultures that European imperialism and colonialism — still very much ongoing at the time — had left around the world in the preceding few centuries.

The exceptional status of the Holocaust rendered the new Jewish state that was established in May 1948 also exceptional, especially in view of the many Holocaust survivors who chose to try to rebuild their lives there.

Israel’s exceptional status led to a willful blurring of its foundational crime, the Nakba: the mass expulsion of more than 750,000 Palestinians and the destruction of hundreds of villages and towns in the 1948 war. That Israel could commit any crime under international law immediately became, in this exceptional framework, almost unimaginable. Impunity for Israel was thus baked into the international legal system after World War II. The urgent need to obscure the Nakba also emerged from the broader impetus to deny the nature of the Israeli state as a settler-colonial project. Paradoxically, Israel’s creation reproduced the racism and white supremacy that had targeted Jews for exclusion and, ultimately, destruction in Europe.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog expressed this white supremacy and colonial mind-set quite explicitly in an interview on MSNBC on Dec. 5: “This war is a war that is not only between Israel and Hamas,” he said in response to a question about the mass killing of Palestinians in Israel’s attacks on Gaza. “It’s a war,” he continued, “that is intended, really, truly, to save Western civilization.… We are attacked by a jihadist network, an empire of evil.” This empire, he said, “wants to conquer the entire Middle East, and if it weren’t for us, Europe would be next, and the United States follows.”

The concept of genocide functioned to protect the exceptional status of the Holocaust and Israel in the international legal system and to enable rather than challenge this long-held view. Until now.

With the ICJ ruling that Israel’s attack on Gaza is plausibly genocidal, every university, company and state around the world will now need to consider very carefully its engagement with Israel and its institutions. Such ties may now constitute complicity with genocide.

A few hours after the International Court of Justice ruling, another court heard a related case: In San Francisco, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of Palestinian organizations and individuals, against President Biden and other U.S. officials for failure to abide by U.N. legal obligations to prevent genocide in Gaza and for complicity with genocide, because of the continued U.S. military and diplomatic support to Israel.

One after the other, Palestinian plaintiffs testified Friday about their family histories during the Nakba; their own experiences of Israeli mass violence; relatives they have lost since Oct. 8; neighborhoods in which they grew up that are no more; schools that Israeli bombings and invasion have turned to rubble; and cafes where they will never be able to drink tea again.

As it happens, these accounts came just before the International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which marks Jan. 27, 1945, when Soviet forces liberated the Nazi annihilation camp at Auschwitz.

We are entering a new era of international law. For the first time, we have seen courts consider the crime of genocide as a legal framework to describe what Palestinians are enduring. Through these cases, the voices of Palestinians point to a new era of Holocaust memory, beyond the denial of the Nakba, to a world that will finally put the voices, knowledge, histories and perspectives of all people who face state violence front and center.

It has become clear that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not the man of this critical moment, according to an opinion piece in the New York Times.

Serge Schmemann, a member of the American newspaper's editorial board, said that the destruction inflicted on the Gaza Strip has reached unbearable levels, and is even getting worse, and the Israeli government is under intense pressure from the families of the prisoners, who are demanding that it make every effort to release them before they die.

He added in his article in the newspaper that the United States and the Arab countries, “keen” to avoid a regional war, are trying to mediate an end to the conflict, but Netanyahu is obstructing these efforts.

He added that Netanyahu's insistence on achieving a "complete victory" over the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) without any consideration for the consequences or losses made him part of the problem. The writer warned that the Israeli Prime Minister is playing a "malicious" game by exploiting the war to serve his political goals, and the Israelis, most of whom support attempts to eradicate Hamas, are fed up with this game.

Rather, he was able to alienate Israel's most important ally, the United States, says Schmemann, adding that Netanyahu deliberately and openly defied American advice because it conflicted with "Israel's vital interests," despite the fact that US President Joe Biden showed his full support for Israel and Netanyahu after the Hamas attack. Hamas on October 7, 2023.

However, a member of the newspaper's editorial board believes in his article that the problem does not necessarily lie in Netanyahu's hardline position, which is shared by many Israelis who were angry about the Hamas attack on southern Israel that day.

He said that Netanyahu's confusion between leadership and political survival, with the widespread perception that he opposes any negotiated settlement, and any American advice or mediation, is not because he truly believes that this conflicts with the interests of the Israelis, as he claims, but because he defies American pressure. Also, his portrayal of the Gaza war as much broader than a mere dispute over the establishment of an Israeli state and a conflict with Iran serves his political goals.

That, at least, appears to be what the majority of Israelis believe, even those who might line up behind the prime minister's insistence on trying to eliminate Hamas.

According to Schmemann, how the war will end, and what will happen after Gaza, depends strongly on who will assume responsibility in light of the raging dispute within the mini-war government between former chiefs of staff Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot on the one hand and Netanyahu on the other hand, especially regarding what relates to the issue of prisoner with Hamas.

The writer concluded that Netanyahu had lost the trust of his people and allies, and that his latest maneuver was to include extreme right-wing nationalists in his government and begin to challenge judicial oversight of the government, which led to weeks of mass protests.

Today (Sunday), the American newspaper (New York Times) quoted American officials as saying that US negotiators have developed a draft of a possible agreement that combines the proposals of Israel and Hamas regarding a deal to release detainees in the Gaza Strip during the past days.

The newspaper stated that the written draft agreement will form a framework for discussion at the Paris meeting, and that it may lead to the conclusion of an actual agreement within the next two weeks, which will bring about a shift in the conflict, as it described it.

It said that the negotiators were cautiously optimistic that a final agreement was within reach, noting that there were still “important” differences remaining, according to the officials who did not contribute.

Earlier today, the Israeli Broadcasting Authority quoted Israeli officials as saying that the Hamas movement is taking a tough stance in negotiations to exchange prisoners and detainees with Israel.

According to the Israeli officials, who were not named by the commission, until this moment there are no conditions that allow the resumption of exchange negotiations, but they said that hope is pinned on the expected meeting in the French capital, in which the heads of the intelligence services of the United States, Egypt, Qatar, and Israel will participate.

The commission said that the heads of the Israeli Mossad, Dadi Barnea, and Shin Bet, Ronan Bar, will participate in the meeting, the focus of which will be “breaking the deadlock in the negotiations and creating a framework for an exchange deal” of prisoners and detainees between Israel and the Palestinian factions in Gaza.

The same officials said: “Hamas insists on a cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, but for Israel, stopping the war is a red line.”

They added: “Qatar and Egypt must be more creative... We hope that we can reach a breakthrough that leads to real negotiations that lead to agreements.”

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres vowed on Sunday to hold to account "any UN employee involved in acts of terror" after allegations that some refugee agency staffers were involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel.

But Guterres implored governments to continue supporting the UN refugee agency for Palestinians (UNRWA) after multiple countries paused funding."Any UN employee involved in acts of terror will be held accountable, including through criminal prosecution," the UN chief said in a statement. 

"The Secretariat is ready to cooperate with a competent authority able to prosecute the individuals in line with the Secretariat’s normal procedures for such cooperation."

At the same time, he said, "The tens of thousands of men and women who work for UNRWA, many in some of the most dangerous situations for humanitarian workers, should not be penalized. The dire needs of the desperate populations they serve must be met."

In his first direct comments on the issue, the UN chief gave details about the UNRWA staffers implicated in the "abhorrent alleged acts." Of the 12 implicated, he said, nine had been terminated, one was confirmed dead and the identities of the other two were being clarified.

Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Finland on Saturday joined the United States, Australia and Canada in pausing funding to the aid agency, a critical source of support for people in Gaza, after the allegations by Israel."

While I understand their concerns – I was myself horrified by these accusations - I strongly appeal to the governments that have suspended their contributions to, at least, guarantee the continuity of UNRWA’s operations," Guterres said.

Israel has alleged several UNRWA staff were involved in Hamas's attack, leading some key donor countries to suspend their funding.

UNRWA fired several staff over Israel's accusations, promising a thorough investigation into the claims, which were not specified, while Israel vowed to stop the agency's work in Gaza after the war.

The row between Israel and UNRWA follows the UN's International Court of Justice ruling on Friday that Israel must prevent possible acts of genocide in the conflict and allow more aid into Gaza."The abhorrent alleged acts of these staff members must have consequences," Guterres said."

But the tens of thousands of men and women who work for UNRWA, many in some of the most dangerous situations for humanitarian workers, should not be penalized," he added."

The dire needs of the desperate populations they serve must be met."Hamas slammed Israeli "threats" against UNRWA on Saturday, urging the UN and other international organizations not to "cave in to the threats and blackmail."

The Israeli media - in its ongoing discussions of the war on Gaza - focused on the performance of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and his attempts to thwart the exchange of prisoners and detainees with the Palestinian resistance in the Gaza Strip and postpone judicial investigations on the grounds that they harm military performance.

Reserve Major General Nimrod Shabir - a former Chief of Staff of the Air Force - said that Netanyahu wants as much as possible to delay the deal to release detainees held by the Palestinian resistance, and that indications show that he does not want the war to end.

He added - in a discussion on Channel 13 - that Netanyahu, because of his political situation, is “very afraid that this war will end,” and said that he (Netanyahu) is thwarting deals regarding the release of detainees.

For his part, Michael Shemesh, political affairs correspondent for Kan 11, accused Netanyahu of trying to postpone the investigation of State Comptroller Netanyahu Engelman into the issue of the war on Gaza, under the pretext of harming the war effort.

The reporter said that Netanyahu sent Government Secretary Yossi Fuchs to meet with the State Comptroller, asking him to postpone the investigation into the war case, and to postpone the investigation, whether related to the Prime Minister’s Office or other security agencies.

Nir Devori, military affairs correspondent for Channel 13, revealed that the State Comptroller sent a response letter to Chief of Staff Herzi Halevy, which stated, “All senior officials and relevant government bodies are subject to oversight, and there is no intention to obstruct the army’s war effort.”

He also said that the State Comptroller recently sent an exceptional letter to the Prime Minister's Office warning that they, along with the National Security Council, would be subject to investigation, and that they must keep all relevant recordings.

The State Comptroller General requested that records be submitted of all meetings held during the war period and the decisions taken during it, so that they could be examined.

The Chief of Staff criticized the State Comptroller's intention to investigate the army's performance during and before the war on Gaza.

Source: Al Jazeera

(“Avi Shlaim” sees a malicious precedent behind Israel’s actions in Gaza)

An interview with the Jewish thinker and writer Avi Shlaim, one of the most prominent group of “New Jewish Historians”

The interview was conducted by Stuart Miller 

Avi Shlaim was born in Baghdad - author of “Collusion Across the Jordan”; "War and Peace in the Middle East"; and the Iron Wall,” but he fled to Israel with his family as a result of the persecution that escalated after 1948. He later moved to England, where he has lived and taught for more than half a century. Shlaim, 78 years old, interviewed us via video technology from his home in England, on the current war as well as his views on it occurring as a result of the past. We have edited this interview for length and clarity.

  -------------

Q-The history of this land is torn between two contradictory narratives, Israeli and Palestinian. What can we say, definitively, about what happened in 1948?

C- Following the 1948 war, the two victorious teams were Israel, which expanded its territory beyond the borders stipulated in the United Nations partition plan for Palestine, and King Abdullah of Jordan, whose army seized the West Bank (which Israel would occupy in 1967), which had been It is supposed to form the heart of the Palestinian state based on the aforementioned United Nations plan. As for the losing team, they were 750,000 Palestinians - more than half the population - who became refugees during the Nakba. These are the true roots of the current conflict.

Q-Noam Chomsky once said that settler colonialism is the most extreme and evil form of imperialism. The Palestinians have had the misfortune of being the recipients of both Zionist settler colonialism and Western imperialism. British first, then American. Since its founding, the goal of the Zionist movement was to establish a Jewish state on the largest possible area of land, with the smallest possible number of Arabs within its borders.

Do Israelis and Palestinians view the current war based on this context?

A- Netanyahu said that we are fighting a “second war of independence.” No one threatens Israel's independence or existence today, so why is it called the Second War of Independence? I think there is a sinister reason behind this - the first war of independence was associated with the Nakba, and today there are indications in the leaked documents that the Israeli government is planning a second mass expulsion (from Gaza). What we learn from history is that when Israel launches a campaign of ethnic cleansing as it did in 1948, it will not allow Arabs to return to their homes. I believe that America bears largely responsibility for what we have reached today because of its blind support for Israel, which continues despite the atrocities the latter is committing in Gaza.

Q-But Hamas spoke of its intention to maintain a permanent state of war. Doesn't this constitute a challenge to Israel's independence or existence?

C- People forget that Hamas won fair and free elections in 2006, not only in Gaza, but also in the West Bank. It formed a government, but Israel refused to recognize it, as did the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. Israel launched an economic war with the aim of undermining the Hamas government, and its European and American allies joined in, further drowning in their eternal shame. This is one of many examples of the utter hypocrisy of Western powers. They say they believe in democracy, and here you have a shining example of Arab democracy on the ground, but the Western allies refused to acknowledge its outcome because the Palestinian people chose the wrong group of people.

Q-The “New Historians” movement sought to break free from old ideas regarding the events of 1948. What misconceptions still persist today?

C- The main misconception is that Hamas is the obstacle to peace. The movement has a horrific charter and an extremist program but, after coming to power, it toned down its program and offered Israel a long-term ceasefire (as part of broader negotiations on the ground and other issues in 2006 and again in 2015). However, Israel refused. So this is a misconception; Israel desires peace while Hamas prevents it from being achieved. Israel is the obstacle to peace.

Another misconception is that Israel wanted a two-state solution. This is complete nonsense! It is now fashionable to say that the two-state solution is dead because of things like Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but I say that the two-state solution was never born; Since 1967, no Israeli government has proposed a two-state solution in a form acceptable to even the most moderate Palestinian leaders, and no American government has ever truly pressured Israel for a two-state solution.

Q-It is clear that you have your firm conviction. In light of this violent and intertwined history, and the current war, can any journalist or historian be close to objectivity?

C- It is very difficult for a person to be objective because it is a highly emotional issue, and emotions are running high now on both sides. But researchers can look at this conflict somewhat objectively. Rashid Khalidi is a professor at Columbia University, as well as the most prominent Palestinian historian of the conflict, and I do not see that we are much different in principle. We both consider that the essence of the conflict is the Zionist settler-colonial movement.

Q- In your book, “The Iron Wall,” you focused on Israel’s insistence on preventing it. How do Hamas attacks affect this perception within Israel?

C- Israel thought itself invincible, and Netanyahu believed “that we can do whatever we want in the West Bank, manage the situation in Gaza, and achieve peace with the Arab countries without having to make any concessions to the Palestinians.” But on October 7, this policy collapsed overnight. Israeli society as a whole is still amazed by this experience. It was a truly shocking experience. Today, the Israelis are no longer able to think balanced. They want the government to remove Hamas permanently. But eliminating Hamas is not possible. Hamas is not a military organization. It is a social movement, and part of the fabric of Palestinian society.

Q-Do you see any possibility of a suitable solution?

A-I wish I were able to see a light at the end of this tunnel, but I am extremely pessimistic.

The American New York Times newspaper quoted American officials yesterday evening, Saturday, that negotiators are close to reaching an agreement in which Israel suspends its war on the Gaza Strip for two months in exchange for the release of more than 100 prisoners held by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), an agreement that could be concluded within the next two weeks.

The officials told the newspaper that the negotiators have developed a draft of the agreement that combines the proposals of Hamas and Israel that were presented in the last ten days, and talks about it are being held in Paris on Sunday between the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), William Burns, with officials from Qatar, Egypt and Israel.

While there are still important differences to be resolved, negotiators are cautiously optimistic that a final agreement is within reach, according to US officials who insisted on remaining anonymous.

Paris and Washington discussions

Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani is scheduled to head to the French capital, Paris, where he will join talks with the participation of the United States, Egypt and Israel to try to reach an agreement on the release of detainees in the Gaza Strip.

The Qatari official is expected to then head to Washington as part of his tour to discuss a new prisoner exchange agreement and a ceasefire in Gaza. According to the American newspaper Al-Monitor, the Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister will meet with senior members of the US administration and senior legislators.

US President Joe Biden spoke by phone separately on Friday with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, in an attempt to narrow the remaining differences.

If Burns makes sufficient progress in the Paris talks, Biden may send his Middle East coordinator Brett McGurk, who has just returned to Washington, to the region to help finalize the agreement.

In a statement yesterday, Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu affirmed his commitment to ensuring the release of detainees who were not released as part of a limited agreement last November. He said, "As of today, we have returned 110 of our hostages and we are committed to returning them all... We are dealing with this, and we are doing so around the clock."

Hamas conditions

The Israeli Channel 12 previously reported Hamas’ conditions for a new prisoner exchange deal, which are: 100 Palestinian prisoners for every Israeli prisoner, a complete withdrawal of the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip, a truce of between 10-14 days before the release of any Israeli prisoner, and a truce for two months. Between each stage of the deal.

On October 7, the Palestinian resistance, led by Hamas, launched an attack on Israeli military points and settlements around the Gaza Strip, during which about 1,200 Israelis were killed, about 5,431 were wounded, and at least 239 were captured, of whom Israel recovered about 105 in an exchange deal and a temporary truce with the Hamas movement. It lasted 7 days and ended in early December 2023.

Since that day, the Israeli occupation army has been waging a devastating war on the Gaza Strip, which left more than 26,000 martyrs, most of them women and children, according to the Ministry of Health in the Strip. The war also caused massive destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe, according to the United Nations.

On the 114th day of the aggression against Gaza, the Israeli occupation army continues to commit massacres, after yesterday, Saturday, it committed 18 new massacres that resulted in the death of 174 civilians, while the Palestinian resistance is engaged in violent clashes with the occupation on several fronts, and has targeted a number of its vehicles.

On the political level, the West is pressing to stop funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), as 9 countries announced the suspension of their funding to the agency, in light of Israeli accusations against a number of its employees.

On the other hand, calls and initiatives for a ceasefire are increasing in the Gaza Strip, in light of the continued Israeli aggression that has left since last October 7 until yesterday, Saturday: 26,257 killed, and 64,797 injured, most of them children and women.

The Times of Israel newspaper said that Prime Minister Netanyahu pressured UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed so that Abu Dhabi would pay the salaries of Palestinian workers who were prevented by Tel Aviv from returning to their jobs.

The newspaper reported, quoting an Israeli official, that Bin Zayed rejected the idea completely and was shocked by the audacity of the request put forward by Netanyahu.

The Times of Israel reported that what the Israeli official said confirms the details of the report published by the Axios website.

The Israeli official explained that Netanyahu spoke with the Emirati president several times since October 7.

The newspaper noted that a senior Emirati official warned that the long war in Gaza risks turning Abu Dhabi's emerging relations with Israel into a "cold peace."

The official, who preferred to remain anonymous, said in a statement to The Times of Israel: “The longer this war lasts, Israel becomes more isolated, and even a warm peace could eventually turn into a cold peace.”

The newspaper reported that this warning is the most stringent that Israel has received since the outbreak of the war from its partners in the “Abraham Accords”, the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco, who normalized relations with Israel about four years ago.

The Times of Israel reported that the statements indicate that the UAE is not considering severing its relations with Israel, but that these relations may become similar to those that link Israel with Egypt and Jordan.

High-level government relations declined after the formation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hard-line government in December 2022 and have almost stopped since the war, noting that Israel continues to operate its embassy in Abu Dhabi, but there has been a decline in public events and meetings.

The Israeli army announced today, Saturday, that the number of wounded among its soldiers has risen to 2,757 people since October 7, 2023, while Israeli information and global military estimates indicate that the number of wounded Israeli soldiers is greater than the officially announced numbers.

The Israeli army also confirmed the killing of 557 officers and soldiers since October 7, 2023.

On the Palestinian side, the Ministry of Health in Gaza announced that the death toll from the Israeli bombing of the Strip had risen to 26,257 martyrs and 64,797 wounded since October 7.

In a television interview on the Israeli Channel 4, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert launched a violent attack on the current war government, and said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does not want to implement a deal to liberate Israeli prisoners held by the Palestinian resistance, and this is what makes us, as he stated, “We manipulate the lives of prisoners.”

Olmert pointed out that Netanyahu made a mistake when he set a goal for the war that could not be achieved, and stressed that "all the achievements achieved by the army do not come close to the declared goal, which is the complete destruction of the Hamas movement." Olmert accused Netanyahu that all he seeks "is internal conflicts and a loss of confidence in the Chief of Staff and Israel's security leadership."

Ehud Olmert said, in his interview, that Benjamin Netanyahu brought “barbarians into the cabinet, and this is unprecedented,” in reference to the religious right parties in “Israel,” so he returned and attacked “National Security Minister,” Itamar Ben Gvir, saying that “Ben Gvir is the enemy of Israel, and I believe that this group (referring to the parties of the religious right) wants the war in Gaza to be only a corridor for the war they want in the West Bank.”

He said, "The Israeli government must decide to stop the military battle at this stage in order to be able to return the prisoners."

In an interview with the Financial Times on October 12, Olmert stressed that what awaits Israeli soldiers is “everything you can imagine, and worse,” adding that the matter “will not be simple, and it will not be fun.” This is based on his previous experience in the aggression launched by his government in 2008 on the Gaza Strip, which lasted three weeks. He has had more than one call, since the start of the war, to stop it, before “Israel” pays more expensive prices. He also always stressed that it was not possible to recover the prisoners without an exchange agreement with the resistance in Gaza.

By Jonathan Cook

The ICJ ruling has assured that the taint on Israel is not going away. The question is, how far will the disgrace and dishonour spread?

 It was easy to miss the welcome news from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday amid the huge wave of disappointment that swept Palestinians and much of the watching world when its judges failed to order an immediate halt to Israel's slaughter in Gaza.

The World Court's justices decided, by an overwhelming majority, that South Africa had made a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians of Gaza. 

In doing so, many members of the 17-strong panel openly defied, and embarrassed, the governments of their own countries – not least the court's president, Joan Donoghue of the United States. 

US President Joe Biden's administration had called South Africa's case "meritless, counterproductive and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever". 

In a sign of how isolated Israel - and the US - is on the legal facts, its arguments found favour only with its own appointee, Aharon Barak, and Uganda's judge. Even Barak agreed that some of the provisional measures against Israel were needed to protect civilians. 

The ICJ ruled that Israel must obey the Genocide Convention, taking urgent steps to avoid the killing and harming of civilians. It should also avoid creating conditions in Gaza that might make life impossible for Palestinians in the territory. 

The court cited remarks from Israel's president, Isaac Herzog, and its defence minister, Yoav Gallant, that Israel had been doing precisely the opposite over the past three and a half months. Their statements suggested the intent was to punish civilians and make Gaza uninhabitable. 

The justices strongly implied that Israel had, to date, failed to honour its legal obligations under the convention and would need to prove to the court within a month that it had changed course.

Almost certainly Israel will defy the court and carry on as before. In the wake of the interim ruling, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue until "absolute victory". 

Moral conundrum

The ICJ has, in effect, put Israel on trial for the most heinous of crimes, and one that Israel has long cited - in the form of the Nazi Holocaust – as the rationale for its own founding as a necessary sanctuary for Jews from European antisemitism.

In predictable fashion, Netanyahu called the genocide charge "outrageous" and "a mark of disgrace" on the court. He tried to weaponise the fact that the following day was Holocaust Remembrance Day, implying that only an antisemitic agenda could lead to the conclusion that it was Israel, not Hamas, carrying out a genocide.

In fact, the World Court has brought into the harsh light of day a moral conundrum western powers have long sought to obscure. 

By killing, maiming and ethnically cleansing Palestinians over the seven decades since Israel's establishment on the ruins of the Palestinian homeland, has a self-declared Jewish state not become the vehicle by which the victims of one genocide perpetrate another? 

After all, what is happening to Gaza today did not emerge out of nowhere.

Israel has been actively disappearing Palestine and the Palestinian people for more than three-quarters of a century. There have been episodes of intense war crimes, such as the ethnic cleansing operations of 1948 and 1967, as well as the invasion and occupation of Lebanon in the early 1980s. 

Those events have been interspersed with long periods of a protracted, slow-motion crime – that of apartheid – designed to divide, ghettoise and erase the Palestinians as a people. 

Back in 2006, in an attempt to bypass the sensitivities of Israelis, as well as overseas Jews and western publics, provoked by a direct accusation of genocide, the renowned Israeli scholar Baruch Kimmerling characterised Israel's crimes as "politicide". He did so the year before Israel began its horrifying 17-year siege of Gaza, turning it effectively into a concentration camp. 

In Kimmerling's view, however, Israel's actions even before the siege and current mass slaughter in Gaza amounted to something close to genocide. 

Court on trial

For the next few years of the court's deliberations, the question of whether Israel is committing the "crime of crimes" will be the front and centre of a legal debate. 

The Palestinians will have to continue enduring a real-time genocide, while the World Court sifts the evidence on whether Israel is actually carrying out what the judges already implicitly concede looks very much like a genocide 

That will be little comfort to the Palestinians, who will have to continue enduring a real-time genocide, while the World Court sifts the evidence on whether Israel is actually carrying out what the judges already implicitly concede looks very much like a genocide. 

But the justices will be under intense pressure to move faster than their usual snail's pace. The court itself, and the system of justice it supposedly upholds, is on trial too. It must do what it is supposed to do: stop a genocide unfolding, not give it label after it has already taken place. 

Even more on trial are all the states that have facilitated, sponsored and tried to shield from proper scrutiny Israel's slaughter in Gaza. They are now on legal notice that they could be investigated for complicity in genocide, conspiracy to genocide and incitement to genocide.

Yes, the trial process will take far too long. But it is now a cloud hanging over every Israeli action. Each attack on a hospital, the continuing denial of food, water and power to Gaza's population, the bombing of "safe zones" to which Israel has ordered Palestinians to flee will be listed and investigated as evidence of a genocide.

And in parallel, the pressure will rise considerably on the ICJ's much weaker sister court at the Hague, the International Criminal Court (ICC), to identify the individuals behind those war crimes. 

South Africa, the World Court agreed, made a plausible case. If Israel has persuaded 15 of the 17 World Court justices that there is a risk a genocide is taking place, the ICC should be actively seeking out those guilty of the many war crimes on which that assessment rests.

Complicit states

Israel will try to make much of the fact that no order was made for it to halt its military assault. 

The court's reluctance to back this demand from South Africa was doubtless driven by political considerations. Had it done so, it would have risked coming into direct confrontation with the real culprit: Washington. 

Israel would have refused to end its attacks, and the matter would then have been referred to the Security Council for enforcement. In turn, the Biden administration would have been forced to wield its veto to protect its client state.

Either way, there would have been no end to the slaughter of the Palestinians. But if the court had ordered a halt, it would have been even more evident than now that it is the US, more so than Israel, that is ensuring the genocide continues uninterrupted. Without US money and weapons, Israel would be in no position to keep bombing Gaza.

It seems that identifying Washington as the sponsor of genocide marked the limit of the World Court's courage

Nonetheless, the US and its allies are now in a tricky position. The day before the ICJ ruling, the Haaretz newspaper reported that Israel and the Pentagon were finalising a major arms agreement.

Israel is to use part of the huge sums of  "aid" it receives each year from Washington to buy 50 fighter jets and 12 attack helicopters made by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. It is also buying more "aerial munitions" because its stocks are running low from its relentless bombing of Gaza. 

According to Haaretz, the need for more attack helicopters, in particular, "is a direct lesson from the current war in Gaza", where existing aircraft have been used to "hit enemy targets and to assist IDF ground forces".

The paper reported senior Israeli officials saying the Biden administration had "expressed a commitment to ensure the rapid provision of weapons and munitions to Israel to assist the IDF in the current war". 

The World Court will now be investigating whether that commitment is, in fact, complicity – or even a conspiracy – to perpetrate genocide.

Legal jeopardy

The ICJ's ruling does not exist in a legal vacuum. On the same day, a federal district court in California heard a case brought against the Biden administration for complicity and failure to prevent an "unfolding genocide" in Gaza.

Other states are in similar jeopardy. Before the ruling, Israel's allies could plausibly argue that their transfer of arms to Israel were made in good faith, even if it was later shown that some of those weapons ended up being used, inadvertently or otherwise, in the commission of war crimes.  

But a suspicion by the World Court of genocide means that other states must act much more carefully to avoid the risk of being accused of complicity. The justices have raised a red flag over Israel's behaviour. Other states are required to take note.

Most European countries have been supplying Israel with arms for years that have been used against Palestinians. But some, not just the US, are actively assisting Israel as it pounds Gaza, helping to contribute to the death toll of at least 26,000 Palestinians so far, most of them women and children.

The UK has been using an air force base in Cyprus to fly dozens of reconnaissance missions over Gaza whose intelligence findings are being shared with Israel. Germany, meanwhile, is reported to be shipping tank shells to Israel to replenish its depleted stocks. 

Western leaders are equally exposed for their role in rhetorically and diplomatically encouraging Israel's assault on Gaza. Ignoring the massive number of Palestinian casualties, as well as Israel's legal status as occupier and its belligerent siege of the enclave, many have prioritised instead a presumed Israeli "right to self-defence". 

The degree to which they may be acting in bad faith was underscored last week when it emerged that a group of Dutch officials and diplomats had turned whistleblowers.

They submitted evidence to the Hague arguing that their prime minister, Mark Rutte, sought to conceal from the public an official finding that Israel was committing war crimes. 

According to the evidence, Rutte asked his legal affairs ministry: "What can we say to make it look like Israel is not committing war crimes?”

Media shamed

The ruling should put to shame western media organisations as well. 

It may be too much to expect that the BBC and others will now, when they refer to Israel, append a description that it is "being investigated for genocide" – just as they currently reflexively describe Hamas as "designated a terrorist organisation by the UK and other governments". 

But the ICJ has put a harsh spotlight on news broadcasters like the BBC that have barely been covering what is going on in Gaza over recent weeks. 

The World Court fears that a genocide may be taking place, and yet the establishment media has quickly grown tired of covering it – quite unlike its endless revisiting of the events of nearly four months ago, when Hamas fighters attacked Israel, and its reports on the plight of the Israeli captives in Gaza; and, let us also note, quite unlike its year or more of headline news about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  

It may be too much to expect that the BBC and others will now, when they refer to Israel, append a description that it is being investigated for genocide

Major media corporations have been taking staff off air who are seen as too critical of Israel's slaughter – insinuating that their scrutiny is driven by prejudice rather than an appreciation of international law. 

ABC, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, sacked an award-winning Australian-Lebanese host, Antionette Lattouf, after high-level Israel lobbyists threatened legal action if she wasn't removed. 

Notably, Mehdi Hasan, who tweeted about Lattouf's sacking, was one of three Muslim anchors on MSNBC removed from the airwaves in recent weeks. Hasan had made headlines with confrontational interviews with Israeli spokespeople such as Mark Regev. 

Social media companies have been no better. A recent Human Rights Watch report found that Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, has been systematically suppressing content about Palestinians and Gaza, making it easier for Israel to evade public scrutiny of its crimes. 

Incitement battle

Perhaps not surprisingly, after Gallant and Herzog's genocidal remarks were quoted so prominently by the court, Netanyahu warned his ministers to avoid commenting on the ICJ's decision. 

Whether or not the court eventually finds that the evidence against Israel passes the high bar set for genocide, incitement to genocide should be far easier to prove. South Africa's petition to the court included page after page of genocidal statements made by senior Israeli officials, including Netanyahu himself.

Israel could lose that particular battle much more quickly. 

But, of course, Israeli officials will find it hard to reign back their incitement, including against the court. 

Gallant responded both by calling South Africa's case "antisemitic" and by suggesting that the ICJ were only too keen to indulge that antisemitism.

What the ICJ has assured is that the taint on Israel is not going away. The question now is, how far will the disgrace and dishonour spread? 

BY MITCHELL PLITNICK

In refusing to pressure Israel into a ceasefire while continuing to launch strikes on Yemen, Biden has shown utter contempt for all Arabs and Muslims, including his own Arab and Muslim American citizens who say they won't vote for him over Gaza.

The two-state song and dance is back on center stage again in Palestine and Israel. As part of their ceasefire idea, the United States, with the backing of Egypt and Qatar, have tied reconstruction in Gaza to normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia and a “credible and irreversible path” to a Palestinian state. 

It’s hardly news to anyone that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately rejected this idea. Netanyahu has centered blocking a Palestinian state for most of his political career. It is the basis on which people vote for and support him. 

Yet when U.S. President Joe Biden, after a conversation with Netanyahu, was asked if a Palestinian state is impossible with Netanyahu in office, he said, “No, it’s not,” a response which launched a million laughs around the world at the blatant obliviousness of the President of the United States. 

Netanyahu, for his part, immediately implied Biden lied, stating unequivocally that Israel would retain security control over Gaza, a position which “clashes with the principle of sovereignty but what can you do.” Indeed, just a day earlier, Netanyahu had stated explicitly that Israel “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River.” That was Netanyahu’s way of saying “from the river to the sea,” though, despite a mistranslation by i24 News that caused some commotion, he didn’t use those exact words. The meaning, however, was clear: Israel alone would exist between the Jordan and the Mediterranean as one apartheid state. 

This was yet another direct shot at Biden, who is, maddeningly, continuing to inflict massive harm to himself politically with his steadfast support of Netanyahu despite the Israeli PM going out of his way to insult and embarrass Biden at every turn. Biden tied U.S. policy to Netanyahu’s whims at the very beginning, in the immediate aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attack, and he has allowed Israel to lead the U.S. by the nose in every way ever since. 

Biden’s entire administration has been reduced to useless rhetoric while refusing to take any action to defend Palestinian lives. That may not be all that unusual, but Biden has also allowed Netanyahu to jeopardize U.S. security concerns and strategic interests throughout the Middle East in an unprecedented manner even for this most unusual of all relationships. He has done this despite growing voices in Israel that are recognizing, even while they themselves are still screaming for vengeance, that Netanyahu is pursuing the war based on his personal needs and interests, not Israel’s.  

Despite reports of Biden “growing frustrated” with Netanyahu, there remains no sign that the lock-step support for Israel is being shaken in the slightest. Biden even seems to be abandoning strategic concerns in order to protect Israel’s onslaught. This is evident in his response to Ansar Allah (commonly referred to as the Houthis) targeting ships with some connection to Israel in the Red Sea. 

Asked if his repeated bombing of Yemen — one of the poorest and most devastated countries in the world after years of Saudi-U.S. attacks — was working, Biden responded, “When you say ‘working,’ are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes.”

The response was stunning. Biden stated plainly that he knows that bombing Yemen will not stop the attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. Even leaving aside the implication that protecting shipping is worth risking American lives and potentially sparking a regional war while the lives of over 25,000 Palestinians in Gaza with thousands more deaths to come isn’t worth just stopping the massive flow of arms to Israel, this single-minded devotion to violence for the sake of violence should be giving every American pause. 

American leaders will argue that they have to “impose a cost” on Ansar Allah for their actions, and that they are “working to end the fighting in Gaza as soon as possible.” But this is obviously futile and false. The attacks in the Red Sea are only happening because of the Israeli onslaught in Gaza, and stopping that genocide will make shipping in the Red Sea secure. The White House is well aware of this, as they are equally aware that the entire temperature of the region is rising every day, with the potential for setting off a much bigger war, intentionally or accidentally, growing by leaps and bounds.

Only one party benefits from the war continuing, and that is the far-right Israeli government headed by Netanyahu. For him, the longer the war continues, the longer he avoids the consequences of his corruption from before October 7 and the outrage of the Israeli people for his actions on and since October 7. 

For Israel’s far-right parties, including Likud, the goal of this war has always been to destroy the Palestinian national movement, not only in Gaza, but in the West Bank as well. It is very much to solve the entire question of the 1967 occupation by establishing an Israel “from the river to the sea” that includes few Palestinians and no “Palestinian nation” as such. The war needs to continue for quite a while for that goal to be achieved. Expansion of the conflict to the Red Sea or Lebanon would widen the opportunities to escalate in the West Bank. 

Biden, as well as his accomplices Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and others, seem oblivious to these realities. Indeed, they seem determined not only to allow Israel to gradually push harder and harder on Hezbollah in Lebanon, but to continue to ratchet up the tensions in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf.

Ignoring domestic realities, too

Biden seems intent on communicating his utter contempt for all Arabs and Muslims — not just Palestinians — and is by no means sparing American citizens in doing so. When asked if he is concerned about so many Arab-Americans saying they will not vote for him, Biden dismissed this by saying that Trump wants to “ban Arabs” from entering the country. 

In response, Abdullah Hammoud, the mayor of Dearborn, Michigan — a key battleground state that Biden is currently losing because of his genocidal policy toward Gaza — said the response was insulting “on so many levels. 1 – Trump instituted a Muslim ban not Arab ban. 2 – most Arab Americans are Christian and most Muslim Americans are non-Arab. 3 – We’ve lost loved ones– family and friends. Our families villages wiped off the map. Not something you simply forget about. Trump is a threat, I’ll never deny that. But so is Biden’s support of a genocide and endless wars in the Middle East.”

The blithe dismissal of Arab American concerns and the lack of familiarity with an issue as huge as Trump’s Muslim ban reflect a deep racism and indifference to Arabs that cannot be disconnected from Biden’s policies in both Palestine and the broader Middle East. The political short-sightedness of literally telling a group of marginalized Americans that they have to vote for you because the alternative is even worse is staggering. Arab and Muslim Americans are not the only group Biden treats this way; just ask Black Americans. But taking such a condescending attitude while funding, arming, and enabling genocide raises both immorality and political suicide to new levels. 

Biden’s comments reflect a lack of strategy both in the region and domestically. They also reflect a U.S. president who is following the lead of a far-right, corrupt Israeli prime minister not only in matters of policy, but also in the racist view of Arabs, be they in Palestine or the United States. 

In Israel, there have been many who have voiced concern about the absence of an endgame or any real strategy in Israel’s assault on Gaza beyond causing as much death and destruction as possible. And while that has been discussed in the United States as well, none of this seems to have penetrated the White House or other parts of the administration. 

Despite Biden’s boundless genuflection to Israel, Netanyahu is positioning his rhetoric to attack the president to forestall any efforts at a ceasefire and also to undermine his already shaky re-election chances. This is being noticed by Biden’s supporters in the media. 

Yet it seems that nothing will be enough for Biden to use the only tool that he has to stop Netanyahu: stopping the flow of arms. Biden seems determined to allow Israel to determine the course not just of the assault on Gaza but of U.S. policy. The question is not why he’s doing that. The question is, why are we in the United States allowing it?

On Sunday, the Arab League will hold an emergency meeting at the level of permanent delegates. To issue a unified position on the decisions of the International Court of Justice regarding the Gaza Strip.

This came according to a press statement issued by Ambassador Hossam Zaki, Assistant Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, and a statement by the Permanent Representative of Palestine to the League, Ambassador Muhannad Al-Aklouk.

Zaki said that the meeting will be held, on Sunday, at the headquarters of the League’s General Secretariat in Cairo, in response to a request submitted by the State of Palestine regarding holding this extraordinary session at the level of permanent delegates, in light of the decisions issued by the International Court of Justice.

The Palestinian delegate explained that his country "requested to hold an extraordinary session of the Council of the League of Arab States at the level of permanent delegates, to issue a unified Arab position on the order issued by the International Court of Justice."

Ambassador Al-Aklouk added, "This request submitted by the State of Palestine came in coordination with Morocco, in its capacity as President of the 160th session of the League Council at the ministerial level, and with Jordan and Egypt, with the support of the member states of the Arab League."

On Friday, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take measures to prevent genocide against the Palestinians and improve the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, but the decision did not include a “ceasefire” text, amid Palestinian welcome.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the court's decision by saying that Tel Aviv "will continue the war" on Gaza, adding that the court "did not ask Israel to cease fire."

On January 11 and 12, the International Court of Justice in The Hague held two public hearings, as part of the start of consideration of the lawsuit filed by South Africa against Israel on charges of committing “genocide crimes” against the Palestinians in Gaza.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its Order yesterday (26 January 2024) on the South African case against Israel involving possible genocide in Gaza.

Predictably, the coverage of the Order in the mainstream media in the West aims to spin the story in ways that are most favorable to Israel, which means minimizing or omitting those elements of the story that make Israel look bad and emphasizing that the ICJ did not order Israel to cease all military operations in Gaza.

Hardly anyone expected the ICJ to rule that Israel would have to stop all military operations in Gaza, since it is at war with Hamas, and the court cannot order Hamas to cease its military operations against Israel. What the ICJ did tell Israel, however, is that it must focus its offensive on Hamas, and not target the civilian population. After all, the genocide charge revolves around what Israel is doing to the civilian population in Gaza, not Hamas.

What really matters in the Order is what it says about Israel committing genocide. How could it be otherwise? Genocide is the crime of all crimes.

The Order clearly states that there is: 1) plausible evidence that Israel has the intent to commit genocide; and 2) there is plausible evidence that Israel is committing genocide.

In response to that dire situation the court ordered Israel to stop committing those acts that appear to be genocidal, and to preserve any evidence that bears on this matter, obviously for the trial ahead.

In short, the ICJ did not make a final decision on the charge of genocide against Israel, but said there is sufficient evidence at this point to believe there is a “real and imminent risk” of genocide, and therefore Israel must fundamentally alter its conduct of the war in Gaza.

I think this is a stunning outcome, especially when you consider the votes among the 17 members of the ICJ.

There were six separate votes on six provisional measures that Israel was instructed to obey.

Four of the votes were 15-2.

Two of the votes were 16-1.

Amazingly, the Israeli judge — who was recently appointed by Prime Minister Netanyahu — voted in favor of two of the measures.

The American judge, who is also the head of the ICJ, voted in favor of all 6 of the measures.

The only judge who voted against all six measures is from Uganda. 

I watched the ICJ proceedings on 11-12 January 2024, and they were conducted in a professional and fair-minded manner.

Both the Israelis and the South Africans sent their “A” teams to the proceedings, and each took over three hours to lay out its arguments systematically and comprehensively.

Finally, I have read the ICJ’s 27-page Order, and it is an impressive document, which is not to say one must agree with all its conclusions.

This was not a kangaroo court.

It seems clear that yesterday was a black day for Israel, as the ICJ Order will leave a deep and lasting stain on its reputation.

On Saturday evening, the Hebrew Channel 12 reported the allegations of the Minister of Finance in the occupation government, Bezalel Smotrich, who said, “A military government will be formed in Gaza and it will be responsible for civil issues.”

Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the occupation will not forget the atrocities that occurred on October 7th.

He stressed that they are determined to achieve all the goals of the war on the Gaza Strip, stressing: “We have no alternative to overwhelming victory and the return of our abductees in the Gaza Strip.”

He pointed out that the occupation has the right to defend itself and that no one can prevent them from doing so.

He stated that he would not retract any word he said regarding the State of Qatar, explaining that the coming massacre against their children is a matter of time, so they must eliminate Hamas.

Netanyahu considered that "Israel has the right to defend itself, as we are fighting a just war that was imposed on us, and after the elimination of Hamas in Gaza, there will be no party that will teach its children to eliminate Israel and the entire Israeli people."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a press conference on Saturday evening, "We are obligated to achieve the goals of the war, including eliminating Hamas, returning the kidnapped people, and ensuring that Gaza will not pose a threat to Israel. There is no alternative to achieved victory. We are committed to victory and we will achieve that."

He touched on the decisions of the International Court of Justice by saying, "There are those who came to the court to accuse us of committing genocide. South Africa came there in the name of Hamas, and the fact that this claim is being discussed proves that many around the world do not know anything about the Holocaust."

Netanyahu considered that "Israel has the right to defend itself, as we are fighting a just war that was imposed on us, and after the elimination of Hamas in Gaza, there will be no party that will teach its children about terrorism and eliminate Israel and the entire Israeli people."

He added, "If we do not eliminate Hamas, the next attack will be a matter of time, and therefore it is important that we complete the mission while there are voices within us that question our determination. These voices are a small minority, they are wrong and misleading, and we will achieve absolute victory."

Regarding investigations during the war, he said, “Examination and investigations should take place after the war and not in the midst of it. It is wrong for officers, leaders and politicians to be busy searching for lawyers, as the government will decide on this issue when the time comes and not those affiliated with it.”

He spoke about relations with Egypt and about Qatar, saying, “Relations with Egypt are ongoing and natural, as each of us has our own interests and there is a need to say certain things. They are concerned about their interests and we are as well. As for Qatar, I will not go back on a single word I said while it is hosting Hamas is funded and has pressure on it, and it has pledged that medicines will reach the kidnapped people.”

He continued, "We will assassinate Hamas leaders, and the day after the war ends, Hamas will be leaderless and without military capabilities."

The Financial Times newspaper revealed that the British government proposed a five-point plan to end the war between Hamas and Israel, and explained that British Foreign Secretary David Cameron discussed the plan this week with Palestinian and Israeli leaders.

The newspaper pointed out that Britain's plan calls for stopping hostilities, releasing hostages, and negotiating a permanent ceasefire. It also calls for defining a political horizon for establishing a Palestinian state and forming a competent government to manage the West Bank and Gaza.

The British plan includes a proposal for Hamas leaders to leave Gaza to another country.

The government media office in Gaza announced, on Saturday evening, that the number of journalists killed by the Israeli occupation army since the beginning of its war on the Strip on October 7, 2023 had risen to 120 journalists.

The office said, in a brief statement: “The number of journalist killed has risen to 120 since the start of the genocidal war on the Gaza Strip, after the death of our colleague Iyad Ahmed Al-Rawag, a broadcaster and presenter on Sawt Al-Aqsa Radio, at the hands of Israeli treachery in the Nuseirat camp in the middle of the Strip.”

On January 18, the office announced that the number of journalists killed in the Gaza Strip had risen to 119, with the killing of Wael Abu Fununa, Director General of Al-Quds Satellite Channel, in an Israeli bombing that targeted Gaza City.

On Monday, the government office said in a statement that Israel “assassinates journalists in an attempt to distort the Palestinian narrative and obscure the truth.”

It pointed out in his statement that since the beginning of the war, Israel has arrested about 10 journalists whose names are known.

Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani heads to Washington as part of a tour to discuss a new prisoner exchange agreement and a ceasefire in Gaza.

According to the American newspaper Al-Monitor, the Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister will meet with senior members of the US administration and senior lawmakers.

Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman's visit to Washington comes after an expected visit to the French capital, Paris, during which he will join talks with the participation of the United States, Egypt and Israel to try to reach an agreement regarding the release of detainees in the Gaza Strip, amid leaks indicating the possibility of reaching an agreement between the Islamic Resistance Movement ( Hamas) and Israel.

A security source from a country participating in the negotiations confirmed information reported by the American newspaper The Washington Post, stating that President Joe Biden intends in the near future to send CIA Director Williams Burns to Europe to help reach an “ambitious” agreement that includes the release of Israeli detainees in the Gaza Strip, and a ceasefire for the longest period since the start of the war.

Yesterday, Friday, the White House expressed its hope for progress in talks to release detainees, and White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said that President Biden discussed with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, the latest developments in Israel and Gaza. Including ongoing efforts to release detainees in the Strip.

Leaks and conditions

These movements coincide with leaks indicating the possibility of reaching an agreement between Hamas and Israel. Al Jazeera's correspondent stated that the two ministers in the Israeli War Council, Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, confirmed that the return of detainees in the Gaza Strip is a top priority, during a meeting with the families of the prisoners.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoted an informed source as saying that Hamas and Israel had reached understandings on most of the terms of the prisoner exchange deal agreement, and the outstanding issue is whether or not there will be a ceasefire at the end of the truce, as it will last for 35 days and will include the release of all Israeli prisoners.

Israeli Channel 12 said that the Hamas movement set conditions before agreeing to a new prisoner exchange deal, and explained that the conditions include:

- 100 Palestinian prisoners for every Israeli prisoner.

- Complete withdrawal of the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip.

- A truce between 10 and 14 days before releasing any Israeli prisoner.

- A two-month cooling-off period between each stage of the deal.

On the seventh of last October, the Palestinian resistance launched an attack on Israeli military points and settlements around the Gaza Strip, during which about 1,200 Israelis were killed, about 5,431 were wounded, and at least 239 were captured, of whom Israel recovered about 105 in an exchange deal and a temporary truce with the Hamas movement that lasted. 7 days and ended in early December 2023.

Since that day, the Israeli occupation army has been waging a devastating war on the Gaza Strip, leaving more than 26,000 dead, most of them women and children, according to the Ministry of Health in the Strip, and causing massive destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian disaster, according to the United Nations.

The Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" published a report stating that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be concerned about the ruling issued by the International Court of Justice.

The report said that yesterday, Friday, the court fired a warning shot at Israel regarding the genocide issue, and expected that the court’s orders would create a major headache for Netanyahu with his far-right ministers, who strongly oppose any steps to reduce the severity of the war.

It explained that the court's ruling indicates that it believes that Israel is on the verge of violating the United Nations Genocide Convention, which it signed.

Politicians' statements

The report indicated that it was expected that the International Court would use the inflammatory statements of Israeli politicians. Such as: Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and President Isaac Herzog to make its case that Israel must take action to prevent what would amount to genocide.

It said that temporary orders, also known as emergency measures, are essentially a temporary judicial order aimed at changing behavior, and requiring the defendant state to take concrete, measurable steps to prevent the creation of conditions that might lead to genocide, even if they are not proven. “Intent” – the most important element – or even before embarking on a discussion of genocide.

The report went on to say that, unlike “intent,” which is difficult to determine, issuing interim orders is much easier; Because it requires a relatively low threshold, all South Africa had to do was prove that the conditions for genocide existed through Israeli statements and threats, and by virtue of the scope and size of the military operation, given the density of the population in Gaza.

Just a confession

Haaretz confirmed that the mere fact that Israel recognizes the jurisdiction of the World Court means that it actually agrees to abide by its temporary orders, and the President of the Court also confirmed the binding nature of these orders.

If Israel does not comply with the steps issued, the court may refer the case to the UN Security Council, where Israel expects an American veto, unless the court’s decision is consistent with declared American policy. Friday's ruling appears to make the possibility of a US veto less likely.

Haaretz added that the mere mention of Israel, even in relation to the mere “accusation” of genocide, is a farce, and a very bad thing for Israel.

A US State Department official said on Friday that the United States hopes that a new agreement between Israel and Hamas to release hostages held by the movement will create space for talks to achieve a more permanent regional peace agreement, including an independent Palestinian state, presenting a long-term vision while its negotiators make shuttle tours in the region.

The official said that while no agreement is imminent, there are "many promising signs" that it is close.

CIA Director William Burns, who helped reach a previous agreement to release Israeli hostages in the Gaza Strip, is scheduled to join new talks on the hostage deal in the coming days.

This follows efforts by White House Middle East Coordinator Brett McGurk to release nearly all of the remaining hostages held by Hamas in exchange for a ceasefire that could last for at least two months.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently spoke with McGurk and Burns about the talks, said the senior State Department official, who requested anonymity while discussing private talks.

The ideal outcome would be a ceasefire to open the way for talks on the issues raised by Blinken during his recent trip to the Middle East, which include normalization talks between Israel and other countries in the region, as well as a multinational plan to settle the conflict, and the reconstruction of Gaza after the end of the Israeli war on Gaza.

Negotiators between Hamas and Israel have put forward a detailed proposal to both sides for a permanent ceasefire, (according to two people familiar with the talks), although there are many obstacles. The proposal was sent to Hamas and Israel via Qatar, which mediates between the two sides with the support of the United States.

It is noteworthy that the White House said on Friday that President Joe Biden spoke with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, regarding efforts to release an estimated 100 hostages still being held by Hamas, and he also spoke with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi.

US officials refused to provide general details about the talks. National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Friday that McGurk was returning from the region after a "good set of discussions" with his regional counterparts.

“We continue to do everything we can to facilitate another hostage transaction,” Kirby said. "We should not expect any imminent developments."

Underlying the talks is a growing sense of concern within the administration about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who continues to reject the insistence of the United States and its allies that the Palestinians obtain their own state. Netanyahu also angered Qatar after Israeli television broadcast an audio that it said said Qatar's role in the hostage talks was problematic because of its ties with Hamas.

American officials are pushing for the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited self-rule in parts of the occupied West Bank (and also ruled Gaza until Hamas expelled it in 2007), to play a major role in governing Gaza after the war, along with the idea of forming an international force to help in the security administration in the enclave for a temporary period.

However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the idea of the Palestinian Authority sharing the governance of Gaza after the war, ruled out accepting an international peacekeeping force in the Strip, and insisted that only Israeli forces could guarantee his country's security.

In its weekly magazine on Saturday, the Financial Times quoted Palestinian Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh as saying that the Palestinian Authority is working with American officials on a plan to manage Gaza once the war between Israel and Hamas ends.

Shtayyeh said that he does not believe that Israel is capable of destroying Hamas and that his preferred solution is for Hamas to become a junior partner under the umbrella of the Palestine Liberation Organization and help build an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

“If [Hamas] is ready to reach an agreement and accept the political program of the Palestine Liberation Organization, there will be room for talk,” Shtayyeh told the newspaper. Shtayyeh also said in an interview with Bloomberg: “The Palestinians should not be divided.”

“We need to put a mechanism in place, something we are working on with the international community. There will be huge needs in terms of relief and reconstruction to heal the wounds.”

Today, Saturday, Israeli settlers placed a number of mobile homes (caravans) on citizens’ lands in the town of Derastiya, northwest of Salfit, with the aim of expanding the settlement outpost in the Al-Qaada area.

According to local sources, settlers added mobile homes (caravans) in the targeted Al-Qaada area, west of the town. This is within the framework of expanding the settlement outpost, after seizing the land, noting that the area is constantly subjected to attacks by the occupation forces and settlers.

It added that the Israeli bulldozers are continuing their demolition work to expand the outpost.

The sources added that the settlers expelled the citizens from the area, and fired live bullets at them, in order to prevent them from reaching their lands and preventing them from returning to them.