USA, alone, again, voting against a resolution that would have recognized Palestine as full member of the UN

USA, alone, again, voting against a resolution that would have recognized Palestine as full member of the UN

    Friday, April 19, 2024   No comments

The representative of Palestine was giving his moving speech, before voting on a resolution that opens the door to granting the State of Palestine full membership in the United Nations. During his speech, Mansour said, “Our Palestinian people have not lost their humanity yet. Our people in Gaza are searching for the remains of life. Gaza is pride, Gaza is dignity,” and here he was overcome with tears, so he remained silent for a while.

Then he continued, saying, “The Palestinian people, in all centers of their existence, want life and cling to it like all other peoples on earth.” Here, the session chairwoman began wiping her tears with her hand and nodded her head to confirm her support for Riyad Mansour’s words and her support for the demands of the Palestinian people.

Mansour concluded his intervention by saying, “Our Palestinian people yearn for freedom and a decent life. They will not disappear and will not disappear. They have never been redundant, so either do justice to them or blow them up.” [inSifuh aw-ansifuh]. Reacting to the speech, the president of the UNSC was shown clearing tearing and shaking her head.

Meanwhile, after the speech, the US representative voted to deny Palestine its wish to join the community of nations, with full membership in the UN.

Washington used its veto power to prevent the issuance of the resolution, and the session chairperson said that 12 countries voted to adopt the draft resolution, while two countries abstained from voting, and one country opposed. She added, “The draft resolution was not adopted due to the presence of a negative vote issued by a permanent member of the Security Council,” referring to the United States.

Palestinian Presidency: Washington’s policy encourages a war of extermination against us

For its part, the Palestinian presidency condemned the United States' use of its veto power to prevent Palestine from obtaining full membership in the United Nations, describing the behavior as "an assault that pushes the Middle East toward the abyss."

Reacting to the US veto, Palestinian, and some other countries, expressed anger, disappointment.

The office of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in a statement that the American policy “represents a blatant assault on international law and an encouragement to continue the genocidal war against the Palestinian people, which pushes the region more than ever before to the brink of abyss.”

The statement added that the “veto” in the Security Council “reveals the contradictions of American policy,” noting that it claims to “support the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” but at the same time it “prevents the implementation of this solution.”

The Palestinian presidency's statement stressed that "the world is united behind the values of truth, justice, freedom and peace that the Palestinian cause represents."

Russia: A desperate attempt to change the course of history

In his speech, after voting on the resolution, Russia's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzia, said that the United States used its veto power against the proposed resolution regarding full membership of Palestine in the organization, "in a desperate attempt to change the inevitable course of history."

Nebenzia stressed that the results of the vote in the Council “speak for themselves, as Washington was practically in complete isolation,” saying that history “will not forgive the United States for its actions,” stressing that “it is shameful for the United States to face this challenge to the international will.”

China's permanent representative to the Security Council, Fu Song, said, “The failure of this measure represents a sad day,” and he also described the American “veto” as “extremely disappointing.”

Among the positions supporting Palestine, Ireland's Foreign Minister, Michael Martin, expressed his feeling of "disappointment with the result of the vote," affirming his country's support for Palestine's membership in the United Nations, and saying that "the time has come for it to take its rightful place among the countries of the world."

Deputy Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations, Nathalie Broadhurst, said that her country supported the draft resolution, thanking Algeria for proposing the resolution, and explaining that her country supports raising Palestine’s status in the United Nations and accepting it as a full member.

Pakistan: Iran has the right to respond to the targeting of its consulate in Damascus

Pakistan: Iran has the right to respond to the targeting of its consulate in Damascus

    Wednesday, April 17, 2024   No comments

Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif stressed - today, Tuesday - that Iran has the right to respond to the Israeli raid that targeted the consular section of the Tehran embassy in Damascus, commenting on the Iranian attack that targeted Israel last Saturday in response to the bombing of its consulate.

Asif warned that the growing tension in the region may affect other countries, including Pakistan, and believed that the furnace of war may spread to countries that support Israel, in his speech to Pakistan's Geo News TV.

He stressed that his country does not want tensions to escalate in the region, but stressed that the genocide committed by Israel against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip must stop.

On the other hand, the minister stressed that his country is in a position that allows it to complete the natural gas pipeline project with Iran, and that it is determined to do so.

He stated that Pakistan is extending the part of the pipeline extending from the Jaffdar region to the Iranian border on its territory.

Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi is scheduled to visit Pakistan on April 22, according to Pakistani media.

The first flow of Iranian gas to Pakistan was expected to begin in January 2015 after the two countries agreed on this, but no progress was made on the pipeline due to international sanctions against Iran and opposition from the United States.

New York Times tells its journalists which words to use when covering the war on Gaza

New York Times tells its journalists which words to use when covering the war on Gaza

    Tuesday, April 16, 2024   No comments

According to a leaked memo, The New York Times restricts its journalists from covering the war on Gaza. The New York Times has instructed journalists covering the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing,” and to avoid using the phrase “occupied territories” when describing the Palestinian territories, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept. American.

According to the site, the New York Times memo also directs journalists not to use the word Palestine except in very rare cases, and to stay away from the term “refugee camps” to describe the places to which Palestinians have historically been displaced within the Gaza Strip, who fled from other parts of Palestine during the Arab-Israeli wars. Previous.

It is noteworthy that the United Nations recognizes the areas to which Palestinians were displaced as camps housing hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

The memo, written by New York Times Standards Editor Susan Wesling, international editor Philip Ban, and others, provides guidance on some of the terms and other issues that have imposed themselves on the scene since the start of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip last October.

While the document is presented as a blueprint for maintaining journalistic principles of objectivity when dealing with the war on Gaza, several New York Times journalists told The Intercept that some of its contents provide evidence of the newspaper adopting the Israeli narrative.

The website quoted a source in the New York Times newsroom - who requested anonymity for fear of being held accountable - saying that the matter “seems professional and logical if you do not have knowledge of the historical context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but if you do know, it will be clear how much it identifies with the Israeli narrative.” ".

The Intercept noted that the guidelines were first distributed to New York Times journalists last November, and were updated regularly over the following months.

On March 14, demonstrators supporting the Palestinian cause stormed the building of the New York Times newspaper in protest against its bias towards Israel in the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip. This is the second storming, as pro-Palestinian demonstrators had previously occupied the newspaper’s lobby on November 11, demanding an immediate cessation. Because of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, they accused the newspaper of bias towards Israel in its coverage of the war on the Gaza Strip.

The deliberate use of key words and adjectives by Western media, and all media outlets for that matter, is and established fact. 

The language used by the media became a reflexive way of describing the events. CNN consistently describes the Oct. 7 attack as "brutal" and "terrorist, but uses no adjectives to describe Israel's retaliation, for example.

Western media will add the adjective “brutal” when talking about Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, but will use “war in Gaza” without attributing who is waging the war and what kind of war it is, which is brutal, destructive, and genocidal according to NGOs, many governments’ officials, and the International Court of Justice.

During the same time period, Western media used the phrase "Hamas' brutal" at least 554,000 times; whereas the "war in Gaza" was mentioned 33,900,000 times without any adjectives or qualifications despite the heavy loss of life and structures--a war that was described by independent observers, including the same media outlets who use this biased language, as unprecedented in the number and size of weapons dropped in the densely populated area just in in the first three weeks.

...

News media platforms’ use of guidelines, algorithms of sort, to create an acceptable narrative for their audience, financiers, shareholders, or governments is no secret nor is it practiced by limited, marginal media platforms. Journalism is a profession that teaches people who work in the field how to use words the same way a soldier is trained to use weapons.

Many people who believe in the need for free press to inform the public thought that the best model is the creation of media platforms that are not beholden to anyone. They thought a structure where a media outlet is guaranteed funding from the government with full and complete editorial independence is the way to go. This is the model of the British BBC and the American NPR. However, a close examination of the editorial policies and practices would reveal that even this model is still controlled by politics, ideology, or leadership still. The recent revelation about NPR is a good lesson in understanding the synergy between politics and journalism. Here is some reporting about the struggles inthe NPR organization.

 

In the letter published on Free Press, NPR’s senior business editor Uri Berliner claimed Americans no longer trust NPR – which is partly publicly funded – because of its lack of “viewpoint diversity” and its embrace of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Berliner wrote that “an open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America”. He acknowledged that NPR’s audience had always tilted left, but was now no longer able to make any claim to ideological neutrality.

In the piece on Free Press, a site run by Bari Weiss, a former opinion editor at the New York Times, Berliner noted that in 2011 the public broadcaster’s audience identified as 26% conservative, 23% as middle of the road and 37% liberal. Last year it identified as 11% very or somewhat conservative, 21% as middle of the road, and 67% very or somewhat liberal.

 

Saudi Arabia UAE--two allies no longer able to solve their problems on their own

Saudi Arabia UAE--two allies no longer able to solve their problems on their own

    Tuesday, April 16, 2024   No comments

Disagreements in secret come to light with the Saudi complaint to the United Nations due to a border dispute.. “Al Yasat” is showing that the two allies and regional economic powers no longer able to solve their problems on their own.

In a letter addressed to the United Nations, Saudi Arabia accused Abu Dhabi of encroaching on the Kingdom’s borders, through the UAE authorities issuing an Emiri decree in 2019, declaring Al Yasat a “marine protected area.”

The complaint indicated that Saudi Arabia does not recognize any measures or practices taken, or their consequences, by the UAE government in the area off the Saudi coast, the “Al Yasat area,” including the Kingdom’s territorial sea and the area of joint sovereignty on the two islands of Makasib.

The UAE demanded the completion of implementation of Article Five of the agreement demarcating the land and sea borders dated between the two countries in 1974.

Riyadh considered the memorandum official, and also called on the United Nations to circulate it to the members of the United Nations, according to established procedures.

This step, according to Gulf affairs experts, means that both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are no longer able to solve their problems on their own, or within Gulf frameworks such as the Gulf Cooperation Council or Arab ones such as the Arab League, and that the dispute has reached the United Nations, the highest international body for conflict resolution. The issue of the “Al Yasat” region is not the only controversial issue between the two countries, as there is something bigger than it, according to what experts point out. The dispute over the “Shaybah” oil field is considered one of the most prominent headlines at the core of the border disputes, and the silent struggle between the two countries over influence in Yemen. Both Abu Dhabi and Riyadh were unable to hide it, or solve it through understandings, and it remained like fire under the ashes. The UAE’s support for the Transitional Council in Yemen, its efforts to divide it north and south, and its fight against the Islah Party, are all actions that worry Riyadh, and push it to thwart Emirati projects and stand up to them. Although the conflict has so far been in its silent and hidden context, most odds say that the clash is not coming. A dispute between groups affiliated with both parties in Yemen.

These are some of the forces that are reshaping a critical region in the world, Southwest Asia and North Africa, the center of gravity of human civilizations for thousands of years,

  

Israeli media: Israeli politicians should thank Jordan; Jordan summons Iran's ambassador to protest

Israeli media: Israeli politicians should thank Jordan; Jordan summons Iran's ambassador to protest

    Monday, April 15, 2024   No comments

Some Israeli media outlets want Jordan to be thanked for standing with Israel during Iran's retaliatory strike for the attack on its diplomatic facilities in Syria. These recent developments are forcing many regional and global actors to make tough decisions and the effects of those decisions may not be felt or known immediately, testifying to the power of these events as transformative ones. 

"While Netanyahu shows nothing but ingratitude towards Biden, the Iranian attack produced the most significant show of support in the history of Israeli-U.S. relations. It also proves the importance of a regional alliance of moderates, including the Palestinians." said the daily Haaretz.

Meanwhile, on Sunday, the Jordanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Iranian ambassador in Amman and asked his country to stop “questioning” Jordan’s positions on the Palestinian issue after the Kingdom announced the interception of “flying objects” during the Iranian attack on Israel.

Foreign Minister Ayman Al-Safadi said, “Today (Sunday) the ministry summoned the Iranian ambassador and sent him a clear message that these insults to Jordan must stop, and this questioning of Jordan’s positions must stop.”

He added, "Unfortunately, there were offensive statements (against Jordan) by the Iranian media, including the Iranian official news agency."

Al-Safadi explained that "Iran's problem is with Israel and not with Jordan, and neither Iran nor anyone else can outbid what Jordan is doing, what it offers, and what it has provided historically for Palestine."

He stressed that "if this danger was coming from Israel, Jordan would take the same action it did, and this is a position we confirm clearly and frankly, and we will not allow anyone to endanger the security of Jordan and the Jordanians."

Jordan confirmed on Sunday that it had intercepted "flying objects" that violated its airspace on Saturday night, coinciding with the missile and drone attack launched by Iran on Israel.

Video clips showed the interception of objects in the Kingdom's airspace during the night, at a time when the remains of at least one missile fell in the Marj Al-Hamam area in the Jordanian capital. Users of social media platforms in the Kingdom also shared video clips showing the wreckage of another missile in the Al-Hasa area in the Tafila Governorate in the south of the Kingdom.

Iran launched more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel on Saturday night, in the first attack launched by Iran directly from its territory on Israel, and not through groups loyal to it. It came in response to a missile attack that targeted the consular section of the Iranian embassy in Damascus at the beginning of this April.

Related, French President Emmanuel Macron revealed on Monday that his country used its base in Jordan to intercept Iranian air targets during the attack on Israel, at the request of the Jordanian authorities.

The French President said, in a television interview, that his country's forces stationed in Jordan intercepted Iranian drones and missiles that were heading to Israeli sites, explaining that the French planes were launched from a French base that has been on Jordanian territory for years.

Yesterday, Sunday, the Jordanian government announced that it was “dealing with some flying objects” that entered the country’s airspace, in reference to the drones and missiles that Iran launched against “Israel.”

Israeli media described the Jordanian move as “historic cooperation,” adding that “for the first time, military cooperation between the two parties is taking place publicly.”

Iranian official: Jordan opening its airspace to Israel against Iran is a strategic mistake

Mehr News Agency quoted the Deputy Chairman of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Iranian Shura Council, Shahriar Heydari, as saying, “The Jordanian government’s opening of its country’s airspace to the Zionists to confront Iranian attacks is a strategic mistake.”

Haidari added, "At least Jordan could have remained silent or even supported Iran's legitimate defense against the Zionist entity."

These statements come after the Jordanian Foreign Ministry announced - last Sunday - that it had summoned the Iranian ambassador to Amman, and asked his country to stop “questioning” Jordan’s positions on the Palestinian issue after the Kingdom announced the interception of “flying objects” during the Iranian attack on Israel.

Foreign Minister Ayman Al-Safadi said at the time, “Unfortunately, there were offensive statements (against Jordan) by the Iranian media, including the Iranian official news agency.”

He added, "Iran's problem is with Israel, not with Jordan. Neither Iran nor anyone else can outbid what Jordan is doing, what it is offering, and what it has provided historically for Palestine."

He stressed that "if this danger was coming from Israel, Jordan would take the same action it did, and this is a position we confirm clearly and frankly, and we will not allow anyone to endanger the security of Jordan and the Jordanians."

 The decision by the rulers of Jordan to be involved in this conflict may further increase division among Jordanians, many of whom either sympathize with Palestinians or are Palestinians themselves, as the kingdom is home to one of the largest displaced Palestinian communities in the world.

Media review: Is Iran's first retaliatory attack on Israel really a failure?

Media review: Is Iran's first retaliatory attack on Israel really a failure?

    Monday, April 15, 2024   No comments

The French newspaper "Le Figaro" argues that the effectiveness of the "Dahiya Doctrine" had already ended, after the Iranian attack, which targeted "Israel."

The “Dahiya Doctrine” is an Israeli military strategy adopted by the occupation in all its wars, since 2006, and takes its name from the systematic destruction of the southern suburb of Beirut during the July 2006 aggression. It includes the use of firepower disproportionate to the source of the threat, and leveling the entire infrastructure to the ground. With the aim of making the popular incubator pay the price for the choices of the resistance leadership, and turning it against them.

The newspaper saw that “the image of the state, which cannot be touched, and which commands respect because it intimidates others,” in turn, after the attack on “Israel,” was hanging by a thread.

The French newspaper said, "After Hamas's direct attack on Israel, on October 7, and for the second time in less than one year, more of Israel's enemies are crossing the difficult borders, ignoring the potential consequences, and this time it is Iran's turn."

The newspaper noted that “Tel Aviv woke up groggy on Sunday morning,” and that millions of Israelis spent a sleepless night, due to the impact of Iranian weapons explosions.

"Le Figaro" confirmed that the Israelis are not naive, and that their confidence in their government was basically limited, and that for them the matter is more important than launching 200 missiles from Iranian territory towards "Israel."

The newspaper pointed out that "Israel" and the Americans must quickly return to the land, instead of continuing to blindly believe in their invincible ability, noting that "Western branches in the Middle East are in danger."

"Le Figaro" confirmed that "Israel's security" has never been threatened to this extent since "its establishment in 1948, and its strong support from the United States."

In a comment carrying a sarcastic tone against the head of the occupation government, Benjamin Netanyahu, the newspaper saw that he believed that he would emerge as the “new Goliath” that the entire region fears after October 7, despite the hostility of the world, including the White House itself, But he is now "the person who was in power when Iran fearlessly struck Israel for the first time."

The newspaper reminded that, regardless of even its nuclear program, Iran is the first military power in the Gulf, and its army is one of the strongest armies in the region, in terms of human resources and weapons, with 350,000 soldiers and 350,000 reserve soldiers.

She saw that while Iran has traditionally been criticized for the weakness of its army, the slap directed at “Israel” has completely reshuffled the cards, stressing that this is an absolute success for Tehran, and it is right to consider it as such, and that Tel Aviv is afraid and that there is a reason for that.

The newspaper stressed that Iran clearly demonstrated its ability, by making this attack a large-scale test of the worst that could happen, stressing that “the unpleasant truth is clear: since the beginning of the rumors about its possible intervention, Iran has not shown any weakness, but on the contrary, "She showed incredible strength."

The newspaper said that the Iranian attack represented a tremendous strategic success in all respects, and that “Israel” is no longer the only one that is deeply afraid of Iran, but there are Western and Arab capitals that completely understood the message.

The newspaper confirmed that the world with Biden is worse than before, and that his weakness has led to the liberation of the regimes most hostile to his global hegemony, adding that it is not certain that the return of Donald Trump now will change anything.

The newspaper concluded by saying: “In less than five years, Russia, China, and now Iran have proven that the West is on the brink of abyss every day, starting with Israel. We need to think about the matter and sound the alarm.”

...

In a related context, the British newspaper “Financial Times” saw that the fear in Washington is that “Israel” will continue to act according to its own perception of the threat, and launch a major attack on Iran, believing that the United States will eventually join the war, and perhaps defeat Iran on its behalf. .

The newspaper stressed that any such calculation would be fraught with risks for “Israel,” as waging a broader war with Iran could drag the United States into the battle, but this test of the United States’ commitment to “Israel” may quickly bring that commitment to the breaking point. .

The newspaper pointed out that, in light of the tense discussions in Washington regarding what this “strict” commitment entails, there is another question that is often unstated, which is: “Is Israel still a strategic asset to the United States, or has it become a strategic burden on it?” ".

The newspaper confirmed that after Washington’s support for “Israel” in Gaza caused damage to the image of the United States in many parts of the world, and the complexity it led to in its efforts to mobilize support against Russia and China, the greatest concern today is that Israeli actions will drag Washington into the ground. To another war in the Middle East.

The newspaper stated that Biden is also paying a domestic political price, as he loses support among young voters, noting that this is not a trivial consideration, especially if it is interrupted with the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu is close to Donald Trump, so that these matters together increase the White House’s reservations towards the government. Israeli.

The newspaper warned that while Iran is being portrayed in Washington as one of four members of the “axis of adversaries,” which also includes Russia, China, and North Korea, for Iran to have the upper hand over “Israel” will mean that this axis will gain more strength and confidence.

The newspaper concluded with certainty that if there is no “game theory” expert in the White House who can balance all these competing data, the United States will need luck, as well as judgment, to reach the other side of this crisis without getting involved in another war.

Iran retaliates: Israel's miscalculation allowed Iran to sideline US and attack Israel at the same time

Iran retaliates: Israel's miscalculation allowed Iran to sideline US and attack Israel at the same time

    Saturday, April 13, 2024   No comments

It may take time before the world learns that Biden's angry 30-minute call with Israel's pm, Netanyahu, two weeks ago, was not really triggered by Israel armed forces killing aid workers, for Israel had already killed more than 250 aids workers in Gaza before this event, but it was about the attack on the Iranian diplomatic facility in Syria. The next few days and months will reveal how costly Israel’s miscalculation was and that would explain Biden's anger.

Biden's anger was not motivated by his respect for Iran's or Syria's sovereignty, of course. It is motivated by the fact that no other State, ever, had deliberately attacked diplomatic facilities even when two states were at war. This global consensus is enshrined in several treaties and protocols. So, for the State of Israel to be the first to attack a diplomatic facility, violating two sovereignties in one strike, other states were put in a very difficult position, and that opened a window for Iran to re-assert its sovereignty and claim self-defense, the same international principle that has been used by Israel to destroy Gaza and kill more than 41,000 of its people after Hamas launched its own attack on October 7, 2023.

So, on Saturday evening, Iran launched its expected attack on Israel, in response to the bombing of its consulate in the Syrian capital, Damascus, in early April, by launching dozens of drones and missiles into Israel.

Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hagari said that the army and air force are prepared for the expected Iranian threats, he said.

He added that the army will try to prevent the Iranian drones from reaching Israel, and will deal with them as soon as they arrive, "but we warn that the defense will not be 100%."

ABC quoted a senior American official as saying that he believes Iran will launch between 400 and 500 drones and missiles at Israel.

CNN also reported that an Israeli military official reported that he expected Iran to launch additional waves of drones over time.

This American news network also said that President Joe Biden has now met with his national security team in the White House Situations Room.

 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel will protect itself from any threat, and that it will do so calmly and with determination, he said.

Netanyahu added, "Israel is strong, its army is strong, its people are strong, and whoever harms us, we harm him," stressing that "Israel is prepared for any direct targeting from Iran."

He continued by saying, "Our defense systems are deployed, and we are prepared for any scenario, whether in defense or attack."

  

Media review: Israel arresting and assassianting family members of Hamas political leaders including chidlren

Media review: Israel arresting and assassianting family members of Hamas political leaders including chidlren

    Thursday, April 11, 2024   No comments

Three of the sons of the head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Ismail Haniyeh, and several of his grandchildren were assassinated, on Wednesday, in an Israeli raid on a civilian car in the Beach Camp in Gaza City, north of the Strip.

Aljazeera journalist, Ismail Al-Ghoul, reported that the “martyrs, who were at least 5, fell while they were traveling in a car to perform family ties and congratulate residents on the occasion of Eid Al-Fitr.”

He pointed out that the toll is temporary and is likely to rise because a larger number of people were on board the targeted car.

The head of the Political Bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Ismail Haniyeh, received the news, while visiting the wounded in Gaza, with patience and composure. The moment he heard the news, he said, “May God make it easy for them.”

Haniyeh insisted on continuing his visits to the wounded after receiving the news.

In his first comment on the assassination, he said in an interview with Aljazeera: “I thank God for this honor with which he bestowed upon us the martyrdom of my three sons and some grandchildren... With this pain and blood, we create hopes, a future, and freedom for our people, our cause, and our nation.”

He added, "The occupation believes that by targeting the sons of leaders, it will break the resolve of our people. We tell them that this blood will only make us more steadfast in our principles and adherence to our land."

 The assassiantion took place after Israel arrested Hanieh' sister just lastr week. 

The Israeli police and the Shin Bet said in a joint statement that their forces, along with border guard reinforcements, carried out a security operation dubbed “Early Sunrise,” during which they arrested a relative of the Hamas leader who lives in the town of Tel Sheva, east of the city of Beersheba.

The statement added that she was arrested on suspicion of having made contact with leaders and activists in the Hamas movement and inciting to carry out "terrorist operations" in Israel.

Sabah Abdel Salam Haniyeh (57 years old) lives with her family in Tel Sheva, a few kilometers east of the city of Beersheba.

 

 

Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

Was Biden angry with Netanyahu for attacking Iran’s diplomatic building, a treaty violation, or for killing aid workers, a war crime, or both?

    Monday, April 08, 2024   No comments

With news reports about US administration reaching out to Iran with an offer to stop its promise of retaliatory strikes against Israel for the latter's attack on Iran's diplomatic facility in Syria, and with Iran's foreign minister making an unscheduled trip to Oman yesterday, it appears that Biden used the killing of aid workers to mask his anger with Israel crossing a red line and carrying out what is essentially a direct attack on Iran.

There is no doubt that Iran can retaliate directly against Israel. It did so against the US when Trump assassinated Soleimani in January 2020. An Iranian retaliatory attack against Israel could set new course for the entire region, however. 

If Iran attacks Israel directly, the right-wing government in Israel will be forced to retaliate or it will collapse. If it were to retaliate to the retaliation, the armed confrontation enters a new phase, similar to the active front with Hezbollah. That will be catastrophic for Israel for many reasons.

Israel cannot invade Iran and if the US does not get involved directly, all Israel can do is to trade rockets and bombs from distance. That formular favors Iran for many reasons, too.  

First, Iran is a much larger country, and its weapons systems are dispersed all over the country. It will not be possible for Israel to take out all weapons systems. If that was possible, US could have done that in Yemen where a much smaller and less prepared group, the Houthis, have overcome a military Western coalition that has been bombing them for months.

Second, Iran has a formidable array of weapons, rockets and drones, that can be launched for months or even years. In addition to these long-distance weapons, Iran can rely on its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq to provide support.

Iran will respond given that the highest authority in the country already stated that Iran will receive “a slap”. The question is whether US diplomacy will manage to limit Iran’s response to limits of Israel’s attack. That is, an attack on Israeli diplomatic missions and perhaps an attack on military installations in occupied territories to end the cycle. Iran has the option to attack Israel directly because it considers its diplomatic facilities sovereign territories of Iran. However, attacking Israel diplomatic facilities places Iran outside International norms, too, which it has been using to get the world community to condemn it. 

All these factors give credence to the reporting about the US offer to Iran, possibly through Oman. Because all these indicator show that Israel committed a grave mistake when it attacked a diplomatic facility. It may not just US acting to prevent the widening of a conflict, it is likely that Israel wants to limit the damage too. 

The following media reports provide more contect to what might be behind the scene negotiations.

Iranian diplomatic sources say the US is trying to convince Iran not to retaliate against Israel for its bombing of the Iranian embassy in Syria earlier this month, Al-Jarida newspaper reported on 8 April.

The Israeli strike targeted a building attached to the Iranian embassy in Damascus. It led to the killing of the commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, his deputy, and five other IRGC officers.

A source in the Iranian foreign ministry told Al-Jarida that Washington offered Tehran direct negotiations with Tel Aviv to de-escalate the conflict.  

According to the source, Washington will guarantee to persuade Tel Aviv to stop its military operations in Syria and Lebanon on the condition that Iran commit not to retaliate against Israel for the Damascus attack.

At the same time, a diplomatic source in Beirut told Al-Jarida that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected an American proposal to pledge to stop attacks in Syria.

The source added that Iranian leader Ali Khamenei is reviewing the US offer but is not expected to accept it if it does not include guarantees for a comprehensive ceasefire in Gaza and to stop all Israeli and US attacks on Iranian targets or those belonging to Iran's allies in the Axis of Resistance.

The source revealed that the Iranians had also previously received a verbal Israeli proposal via a Gulf state. In the proposal, Tel Aviv claimed it was ready to stop operations against Iranian targets in Syria and Lebanon in exchange for Tehran abandoning retaliation for the killing of Zahedi, whose killing was considered the most significant blow to Iran since the assassination of Qassem Soleimani.

According to the source, the Iranian Foreign Ministry responded to the Israeli message by saying that the proposal must also include a ceasefire in Gaza.

However, some IRGC leaders were unhappy with the foreign ministry's response, viewing the Israeli proposal as a trap. The IRGC leaders argued that any negotiations with Israel must take place only after Iran has retaliated.

The source stated that IRGC commanders believe that Israel's targeting of the Iranian consulate is an opportunity that should not be missed to strike a strong blow at Israel, especially since the consular building in Damascus is considered sovereign Iranian territory and was targeted in a clear violation of international law.

The source said that the IRGC leadership believes Washington will not enter a war with Iran even if it retaliates against Israel. They also consider that an adequately harsh strike against Israel will compel it to accept a ceasefire in Gaza and abandon any plans to invade Lebanon or escalate its bombing in Syria.

Western government continue to lose credibility

Despite the fact that the attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission in Syria violated global treaties including the Vienna Conventions regulating diplomatic and consular relations and the immunities of diplomats and headquarters (1961, 1963, 1969) and the Rome Statute, US government and its Western allies did not explicitly condemn the attack. Instead, they called on Iran to exert “self-restraint.” 

On Thursday, the German Foreign Ministry called, through a statement, on all parties in the Middle East to calm down, exercise restraint, and act responsibly, following a call by Minister Annalena Baerbock who discussed the matter with Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian.

On Thursday, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron warned of “expanding conflicts”. During a phone call with his Iranian counterpart, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, according to a statement by the Iranian Foreign Ministry that was reported by local media outlets, including the private “Tasnim” agency.

According to the agency, the Iranian Foreign Ministry quoted Cameron as saying that he asked Iran to exercise restraint, and said that “lack of restraint on the part of the parties could lead to further expansion of conflicts in the region.”

Regional powers on the other hand voiced condemnation, directly accusing Israel of violating international norms.

Turkey denounced, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the bombing and considered it a violation of international law, warning that the attack may lead to an exacerbation of the conflict in the region.

Saudi Arabia also condemned the targeting in a Foreign Ministry statement, expressing its “categorical rejection of targeting diplomatic facilities for any justification, and under any pretext.”

In a brief Foreign Ministry statement, the UAE condemned “the targeting of the Iranian diplomatic mission in the Syrian capital, Damascus,” without any additional comment.

Qatar also condemned, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack, and considered it “a blatant violation of international agreements and conventions,” stressing “its complete rejection of targeting diplomatic and consular missions and the necessity of providing protection for their employees in accordance with the rules of international law.”

Egypt said, in a statement to the Foreign Ministry, “We categorically reject the attack on diplomatic facilities under any justification, and we stand in solidarity with Syria in respecting its sovereignty and the integrity of its lands and people.”

Kuwait also considered, in a Foreign Ministry statement, the attack a “flagrant assault,” renewing its call on “the international community and the Security Council to assume its responsibilities towards taking the necessary measures and exerting the necessary efforts to preserve the safety and stability of the countries of the region and reduce tension and escalation.”

In a statement condemning the attack, the Omani Foreign Ministry stressed “the need to stop the escalation in the region and reject aggression and other actions that threaten security and stability,” expressing condolences to the families of the victims and wishing a speedy recovery to the injured.

Iraq also confirmed in a Foreign Ministry statement that the attack “represents a clear and flagrant violation of international law and Syrian sovereignty,” warning that “the expansion of the cycle of violence in the region will lead to more chaos and instability.”

China and Russia, on the other hand, took advantage of Western reluctance to denounce the flouting of international law

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said that his country strongly condemns the Israeli attack and stresses that the security of diplomatic institutions cannot be violated. He stressed in a press conference in Beijing that “China opposes any actions that lead to escalation of tensions in the Middle East region.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday strongly condemned the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate building in the Syrian capital Damascus earlier in the day, denouncing the action as "unacceptable."

"We consider any attacks on diplomatic and consular facilities, the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the relevant Vienna Conventions, to be categorically unacceptable," the ministry said in a statement.

Noting that the attack was carried out in a densely populated metropolitan area with a high risk of mass civilian casualties, the ministry said such "aggressive" actions by Israel are "absolutely unacceptable and must be stopped."

 

The Saudi Mufti Prohibits giving money for Iftar charity, legitimizes slavery

The Saudi Mufti Prohibits giving money for Iftar charity, legitimizes slavery

    Monday, April 08, 2024   No comments

Saudi Arabia’s highest religious authority, issuing a religious decree concerning the practice of giving Iftar sadaqa in the form of cash (money), provided reference that can be seen as legitimizing slavery despite its abolition all around the world and despite the evidence in the Quran that designated slavery as evil and encouraged Muslims to free slaves when unable to fast, break an oath, or commit other moral or legal infractions. The Fatwa comes in a time when more than 2 million people in Gaza are starved to death and could need cash provided to them through aid organizations who can only receive money from the world community.

According to the Saudi Press Agency, the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom said, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Chairman of the Council of Senior Scholars and Chairman of the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Fatwa, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al Sheikh, issued a ruling that giving Zakat al-Fitr in money is not valid “because that is contrary to the Sunnah of the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him. May God bless him and grant him peace and the Rightly Guided Caliphs who used to remove it from food.”

The Saudi Mufti added that “Zakat al-Fitr has been prescribed for all Muslims, males and females, old and young, free and slaves.”

It should be noted that other Sunni schools of law consider giving iftar charity in the form of cash (or anything of value), to be valid.

The kingdom has been run through an arrangement that granted Wahhabi scholars from Al Sheikh clan, religious power in return for their blessing of the form of governance in the kingdom under the control of the Al Saudi clan. Saudi Arabia’s official religious practices are derived from the Wahhabism, the strictest religious sect in Islamic societies and Wahhabi religious figures use textual evidence irrespective of rational facts and changed circumstances. The same sect is followed by members of al-Qaeda and the “Islamic State”.