Qatar's threat to abandon mediation between Hamas and Israel opens the door for an increased role for Iran and Turkey

Qatar's threat to abandon mediation between Hamas and Israel opens the door for an increased role for Iran and Turkey

    Sunday, April 21, 2024   No comments

With Qatar announcing its intention to re-evaluate the mediation role it plays between Hamas and Israel and the US pressure on Qatar to force it to coerce Hamas to accept the deal of face terrorism charges for its fund transferred to Hamas, other states opened their door to Hamas political leaders.

After Iran's official reception of Palestinian leaders, now Turkish leaders formally welcomed the head of Hamas in Ankara.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's reception of the head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Ismail Haniyeh, on Saturday sparked the anger of Israeli politicians and newspapers.

 It also signals an end or a diminished roles for Qatar and Egypt in any future negotiations to not only end the war, but also to arrange for post war Gaza and Palestine. It also reveals new realignments and emerging future coalitions in the new Middle East, after Jordan participated in the first direct military confrontation between Iran and Israel--as noted by some observers.

Andreas Craig, an expert on Middle East affairs at King's College in London, pointed out that Doha played a "decisive role" in concluding the truce last November, and it is "dissatisfied that everyone, especially Israel, does not acknowledge this."

However, in his opinion, it is unlikely that it will “withdraw from mediation efforts” after it “took control of the relationship” with Hamas, and he said that Qatar is “indispensable” in mediation efforts.

Qatar has become the main communication channel with Hamas, which has maintained its political office in Doha since 2012.

On the other hand, Dorsey believes that “if Qatar withdraws from the talks, it will be subject to more pressure to expel Hamas from its lands.”

The expert wondered if the political office moved to Iran: “To whom will the Americans and Israelis turn to reach Hamas?”

Unlike Jordan, which admitted to shooting down Iran's missile heading to targets in Israel, Turkey, despite it being a member of NATO, came strong in refuting any insinuation that it participated in the interception of the missiles. 

The Anti-Disinformation Center of the Turkish Presidency’s Communications Department said in a statement on Saturday evening that the allegations in this regard “do not reflect reality.”

The statement pointed out that the allegations related to the radar base in Koracik, which were circulated following Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s meeting with the head of the Hamas Political Bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, on Saturday, had previously been denied by the Anti-Disinformation Center.

The statement stressed that “the allegations are baseless, and were deliberately put forward for circulation again.”

“Information taken from the radar system in Koracek is only shared with Allies within the framework of NATO procedures,” the statement read.

He stressed that “it is not possible to share this information with countries that are not NATO allies, such as Israel.”

He added: “Turkey has always stood by the just cause of our Palestinian brothers and will continue to do so in all circumstances,” and stressed the need not to pay attention to “misinformation campaigns.”

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.

 

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.

 

 

Why does it take the killing of non-Gazans for the West to see war crimes?

Why does it take the killing of non-Gazans for the West to see war crimes?

    Wednesday, April 03, 2024   No comments

Politico reported that the US and other Western governments were “outraged” by the “devastating” attack that killed 7 workers from the World Central Kitchen, just another a war crime. Ironically, these governments do not seem to be outraged by the fact that these seven aid workers were killed because they were in Gaza feeding 2 million people starved by a war that is enabled by them. 33,000 civilians killed in Gaza, 70% of whom are children and women, did not cause outrage to summoned Israel diplomats. But this incident does.

The news outlet reported that

 "Israel’s strike against aid workers trying to get food to residents in Gaza reverberated across Washington on Tuesday, particularly resonating because of the American death and the connections the group’s founder — José Andrés — has to the capital. Administration officials lashed out at new levels, and Israel was left struggling for damage control."

Western media provided extensive coverage as if these are the only seven uninvolved civilians killed by Israelis strikes in the past 6 months.