Media Review, Media Bias: War and Language

Media Review, Media Bias: War and Language

    Sunday, July 19, 2026   No comments

How Arab State Media Narrate Conflict and Risk Their Own Survival

In the theater of modern warfare, language is a weapon of geopolitical alignment. Since the Arab Spring of 2011, state-controlled and state-aligned media across the Arab world have increasingly functioned as extensions of foreign policy. By carefully curating their lexicons, these outlets signal bias, legitimize certain military actions, and delegitimize others. Today, as the region grapples with the fallout of the US and Israeli war on Iran, the selective outrage embedded in Gulf media narratives is not only distorting reality but also planting the seeds of domestic instability.

The blueprint for this linguistic weaponization was clearly established during the Yemen conflict and the subsequent 2017 Gulf diplomatic crisis. When the Saudi-led coalition intervened in Yemen, a stark divergence in media framing emerged. Saudi-aligned outlets consistently employed highly charged, valorizing terminology: Saudi casualties were exclusively referred to as "شهداء" (martyrs), while Yemeni casualties were described as "أشخاص قُتلوا على يد القوات السعودية العادلة" (persons killed by the righteous Saudi forces).

In contrast, Aljazeera, based in Qatar, adopted a more neutral, journalistic lexicon, consistently using the word "قتلى" (killed) for casualties on all sides. This seemingly minor semantic difference carried immense political weight. It challenged the moral absolutism of the Saudi narrative. The threat this posed to Riyadh’s geopolitical project was so profound that, in 2017, Saudi Arabia and its allies issued a list of demands to Qatar to end the blockade, prominently featuring the immediate and permanent shutdown of Al Jazeera. That demand, as history has shown, went nowhere, but it established a lasting precedent: in the eyes of certain Arab states, neutral language is an act of political defiance.

This pattern has reached a dangerous apex in the current US and Israeli war on Iran, a campaign executed and supported by US troops stationed in Gulf States and Jordan. A review of recent headlines from Saudi-aligned and Gulf-centric media outlets, such as Asharq Al-Awsat, reveals a meticulously crafted narrative of selective outrage.

When reporting on Iranian military actions, these outlets deploy a lexicon of moral condemnation. Recent headlines from July 2026 describe Iranian actions as:

• "العدوان الإيراني الآثم" (The sinful Iranian aggression)
• "اعتداءات إيرانية جديدة" (New Iranian assaults)
• "نهج عدواني ممنهج" (A systematic hostile approach)
• "اعتداءاتها الجوية الإيرانية الغادرة" (Treacherous Iranian air assaults)

These phrases are designed to frame Iran as a rogue actor violating international law and threatening Arab sovereignty. However, when these same media outlets report on US and Israeli military actions against Iranian territory, the vocabulary shifts dramatically. US and Israeli bombardments are routinely sanitized as "غارات" (strikes) or "هجمات" (attacks). The word "عدوان" (aggression) is conspicuously absent.

This linguistic sanitization serves a clear political purpose: to normalize the presence of US military forces in the region and to frame the US-Israeli campaign as a legitimate, defensive, or corrective measure, rather than what international legal experts have identified it to be.

The Gulf media narrative stands in direct contradiction to the consensus of the international legal community. The war on Iran has been widely documented as lacking proper legal authority and factual justification.

In March 2026, UN Human Rights experts issued a stark press release, explicitly denouncing the US and Israeli military assaults on Iran and Lebanon as "flagrant violations of international law" and unequivocally labeling them an "act of aggression." The experts warned that the unprovoked attacks, carried out while negotiations were ongoing, constitute a dangerous precedent of impunity.

Furthermore, a landmark letter published by Just Security, signed by over 100 prominent US-based international law experts and professors, condemned the US role in the conflict. The letter detailed how the initiation of the campaign was a "clear violation of the United Nations Charter" (jus ad bellum), as it lacked Security Council authorization and was not an act of self-defense against an imminent threat. The experts also raised alarms over jus in bello violations, citing strikes on civilian infrastructure, including schools and energy facilities, and condemned dangerous rhetoric from US officials dismissing the rules of engagement as "stupid."

While UN experts and legal scholars universally apply the term "aggression" to the US-Israeli campaign, Gulf state media remain silent on this legal reality, choosing instead to act as a linguistic shield for their powerful allies.

The Domestic Boomerang: When Populations Stop Listening

This deliberate cognitive dissonance carries severe domestic risks. The Arab landscape has changed dramatically since 2011. Populations are no longer captive audiences to state-controlled media. With widespread access to satellite television, social media, and independent digital journalism, citizens can easily compare the hyperbolic condemnation of Iran with the sanitized coverage of US actions.

This selective outrage is eroding the credibility of state institutions. Nowhere is this more acute than in Jordan. The Hashemite Kingdom has found itself in a precarious position, hosting US troops and participating in air defense efforts against Iranian projectiles, such as the recent rocket attacks on the Muwaffaq al-Salti airbase. While the Jordanian government frames its actions as defensive sovereignty, a significant majority of the Jordanian public views this blind support for a foreign-led military campaign as fundamentally misaligned with national interests.

By aligning its media narrative and military posture with a war that is widely perceived as illegal and unjust, the Jordanian government is risking severe domestic backlash. The potential for public uprising is no longer a fringe theory; it is a tangible consequence of a populace that feels its government is sacrificing its well-being for geopolitical patrons who do not reciprocate the loyalty.

The Ultimate Strategic Blunder

Language matters, especially during times of war. Words shape perception, and perception dictates political legitimacy. The Gulf states and Jordan, by weaponizing language to show selective outrage, are engaging in a dangerous gamble. They risk losing what is left of their standing among their own people, who are increasingly adept at seeing through the propaganda.

There is a profound, tragic irony at the heart of this conflict. The US and Israeli war on Iran was explicitly designed, in part, to foment regime change in Tehran. Yet, by acting as complicit enablers—both militarily and linguistically—the supporting Arab states are exposing their own populations to the radicalizing effects of war, economic strain, and perceived national humiliation.

When the outcome of this war is not regime change in Iran as now stated by even those who started the war, but rather the destabilization, weakening, or even the fall of regimes in the Gulf and Jordan, it will stand as the biggest strategic blunder in modern Middle Eastern history. The supporters of this war may find that the linguistic and political tools they used to target their adversaries have ultimately written the epitaph of their own rule.

  

Trump’s Push for Syria to Confront Hezbollah: A Recipe for Regional Chaos

Trump’s Push for Syria to Confront Hezbollah: A Recipe for Regional Chaos

    Friday, July 17, 2026   No comments

In a move that has sent shockwaves through an already fragile Middle East, U.S. President Donald Trump has reportedly been pressing the new Syrian leadership to take military action against Hezbollah in Lebanon. According to recent reports, Trump has suggested that the Islamist-led insurgents, led by a former al-qaeda leader, who overthrew Bashar al-Assad a year and a half ago are better positioned to root out the Iran-backed militant group than the Israeli army. While the White House may view this as a convenient offloading of regional burdens, the reality is starkly different: greenlighting Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa (formerly known as Julani) to “take care of” Hezbollah will create a vastly larger and more intractable problem for the region than it could ever solve.

The Iraqi Warning: A Line in the Sand

The profound dangers of this proposal have not gone unnoticed in Baghdad. The Iraqi government has recently issued a stark “advice” to Sharaa, explicitly warning Damascus against any involvement in the Lebanese file. According to regional sources, the Iraqi message carried a clear caveat: any Syrian encroachment into Lebanon will have direct, severe repercussions on Syria itself. Baghdad made it unequivocally clear that if Lebanese Shias or Hezbollah face any danger originating from Syrian territory, Iraqi resistance factions will not stand idly by. “Every Syrian step toward Lebanon may be followed by an Iraqi step toward Syria,” the warning read.

This is not an empty threat. It is rooted in recent, painful history. Syria is currently ruled by unelected rebel factions that have a documented track record of threatening and killing Iraqis. It was not so long ago that it took the massive, desperate mobilization of Iraqi volunteer forces—the Hashd al-Shaabi (Popular Mobilization Forces)—to counter the very same Islamist ideologies that now hold power in Damascus. Crucially, this mobilization was authorized by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and other prominent religious leaders to defend Iraq and protect Shia communities from existential threats. The memory of that defense remains vivid and potent.

The Disarmament Paradox

If the United States and Israel genuinely desire the disarmament of Hezbollah and the Iraqi Hashd forces, suggesting that a Syrian regime composed of former rebels will intervene in Lebanon to crush Shias is profoundly counterproductive. Rather than coercing these groups into laying down their arms, such a scenario validates their core narrative: that they are under imminent threat of annihilation.

For Hezbollah, a Syrian-led offensive would be framed as an existential war, guaranteeing fierce resistance. For the Hashd al-Shaabi in Iraq, the logic is equally clear. Faced with the prospect of Syrian rebels attacking Shias in Lebanon, Iraqi paramilitary forces will now insist, with heightened public and religious backing, that they must remain fully armed, mobilized, and ready to defend their brethren across the border. Any Western or Israeli hope of demobilizing these forces will instantly evaporate, replaced by a hardened resolve for self-defense.

Unleashing Internal Fragility in Iraq

The ripple effects of this destabilizing rhetoric extend far beyond the Hashd. Trump’s proposal inadvertently sheds harsh light on the fragile monopoly on force held by the central Iraqi government. If the state cannot guarantee the security of Shia communities regionally, it emboldens other armed groups operating outside Baghdad’s command.

This includes the Peshmerga and various other Kurdish armed factions. Whether these groups are anti-Turkey or anti-Iran, their entrenched bases in Iraq represent a complex web of localized power. A regional escalation triggered by Syrian intervention in Lebanon would provide these groups with both the pretext and the opportunity to expand their own military postures, further fracturing Iraq’s internal security and complicating any efforts at national cohesion.

A Pattern of Impulsive Diplomacy

Trump’s claim that he will greenlight Sharaa to handle Hezbollah fits a troubling trend in his on-the-spot, ill-conceived decision-making. Historically, such impulsive geopolitical gambits have generated cascading problems that their architects are utterly unequipped to solve. Treating the Middle East as a chessboard where rebel factions can be casually redirected to fight proxy wars ignores the deep-seated sectarian, historical, and political realities of the region.

Even Syrian interim president Sharaa has reportedly pushed back against this idea, telling Iraqi officials that he refused the U.S. request and that Damascus is not interested in reopening old fronts or returning to past policies of regional intervention. His priority, he stressed, is internal stability. Still, the mere amplification of this idea by the U.S. president is enough to destabilize the delicate balance of power.

A Region Governed by Weakness and Trauma

The Iraqi government’s stern warning to Syrian rulers serves as a microcosm of how extraordinarily complex the Middle East has become. It is a region now characterized by weak central regimes and territories ruled by former rebels, all navigating a post-Gaza war landscape that has displayed a total disregard for human dignity and international law. The trauma of recent conflicts has left communities hyper-vigilant and deeply distrustful of external meddling.

True regional stability cannot be achieved by pitting one fragile, rebel-led state against another, nor by encouraging sectarian proxy wars. If the international community wishes to see the disarmament of militias and the stabilization of the Levant, it must pursue inclusive diplomacy, strengthen legitimate state institutions, and cease floating dangerous, half-baked military alternatives. Otherwise, Trump’s latest suggestion will not be a solution, but the spark that ignites the next, even more devastating, regional conflagration.

A Shepherd's Death and the Shadow of Secret Bases

A Shepherd's Death and the Shadow of Secret Bases

    Monday, May 18, 2026   No comments

Iraq Grapples with Allegations of Israeli Military Presence

In the vast, windswept expanse of Iraq's western desert, a routine journey for supplies ended in tragedy, casting a long shadow over regional tensions and raising urgent questions about sovereignty, secrecy, and the hidden geography of modern conflict. Awad al-Shammari, a local shepherd, set out on what should have been an ordinary trip. He never returned. According to local accounts and a recent investigation, his death may be directly linked to the discovery of something far more consequential than lost livestock: the alleged presence of covert Israeli military installations on Iraqi soil.

The story that has since unfolded points to a clandestine outpost established by Israel in the remote desert, reportedly constructed shortly before the escalation of conflict with Iran in early 2025. This facility, described as a forward operating base, is said to have supported aerial operations and housed special forces units, potentially serving as a critical node for missions deep into Iranian territory. A second, older base in the same region is also reported to have been active during earlier confrontations, suggesting a longer-term, strategic footprint.

For Awad al-Shammari, the abstract realities of geopolitical maneuvering became fatally concrete. Witnesses recount that after stumbling upon one of these installations, his pickup truck came under fire from a helicopter. His family's desperate two-day search ended in grim discovery: a burned vehicle and the remains of the shepherd. The circumstances of his death have ignited a firestorm of anger and grief across Iraq, a nation that does not recognize Israel and views any unauthorized foreign military presence as a profound violation.

The revelations have intensified scrutiny on Iraq's powerful allies. Reports indicate that U.S. officials were aware of at least one of the bases months before the shepherd's discovery, yet this intelligence was not shared with the Iraqi government. This alleged omission has fueled accusations of betrayal and complicity. Iraqi lawmakers have voiced outrage, with one parliamentarian asserting that American forces effectively ceded Iraqi airspace to Israeli operations during the recent conflict, even ordering the deactivation of local radar systems. The suggestion that Iraqi territory was used to host a secret intelligence center for a state with which Baghdad has no diplomatic relations strikes at the heart of national pride and security.

In the absence of an official comment from the Iraqi government, the void has been filled with public demand for answers and accountability. Citizens and officials alike are calling for a transparent investigation into both the death of Awad al-Shammari and the broader question of foreign military activities within the country's borders. The incident underscores the precarious position of Iraq, often caught as a theater for proxy conflicts and clandestine operations between larger powers.

Beyond the immediate political fallout, the story of the shepherd serves as a poignant reminder of the human cost of hidden wars. While strategic analysts debate the operational significance of desert outposts, for a family in rural Iraq, the consequence is irreparable loss. The burned truck in the desert is not just evidence in a geopolitical dispute; it is a tombstone for a man whose only crime may have been being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As pressure mounts, the path forward remains uncertain. Will Baghdad launch a formal inquiry? How will its complex relationships with Washington and other regional actors withstand the strain? The answers will shape not only Iraq's immediate future but also the rules of engagement for covert action in one of the world's most volatile regions. For now, the desert holds its secrets, and a nation waits for truth, while mourning a shepherd whose final journey exposed the hidden lines of a shadow war.

Ali Al‑Zaidi’s Nomination and Iraq’s Fragile Path to Regional Stability

Ali Al‑Zaidi’s Nomination and Iraq’s Fragile Path to Regional Stability

    Monday, April 27, 2026   No comments

 

In a development that could reshape Iraq’s political trajectory and ease mounting regional tensions, the Coordination Framework, Iraq’s dominant Shiite parliamentary bloc, has nominated Ali Al‑Zaidi as its consensus candidate for prime minister. The announcement came after weeks of intense internal negotiations and marked a potential turning point in a political crisis that had paralyzed Baghdad since the November elections. The selection of Al‑Zaidi was neither straightforward nor predetermined. The Coordination Framework’s deliberations unfolded in three distinct phases. Initially, former Prime Minister Nouri al‑Maliki appeared poised for a comeback, securing support from ten of the framework’s twelve key members after incumbent Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al‑Sudani stepped aside. This momentum stalled, however, when U.S. President Donald Trump publicly warned that Washington would no longer help Iraq if Maliki returned to power, citing what he called Maliki’s insane policies and ideologies. With Maliki’s path blocked, attention shifted to Bassem al‑Badri, who reportedly secured seven signatures within the framework, but this support proved insufficient to overcome internal divisions, turning his candidacy into a proxy battle between competing factions. In marathon sessions hosted by Falih al‑Fayyad, head of the Popular Mobilization Forces, negotiators finally converged on Al‑Zaidi, a figure described as a technocrat with economic expertise who could bridge ideological divides without granting decisive victory to any single camp. President Nizar Amedi formally tasked Al‑Zaidi with forming a new government, granting him thirty days under Article 76 of Iraq’s constitution to assemble a cabinet and secure parliamentary confidence.

Ali Shakir Mahmoud Al‑Zaidi was born in Baghdad in 1978 and brings a profile distinct from Iraq’s traditional political class. He holds a PhD in public law with a specialization in constitutional law, as well as bachelor’s and master’s degrees in finance and banking. He has served as chairman of Al‑Janoob Islamic Bank and CEO of Dijlah TV. Notably, Al‑Janoob Islamic Bank was among several Iraqi financial institutions sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury in 2024 over allegations of facilitating dollar transfers to Iran, a detail that underscores the delicate balancing act Al‑Zaidi must now perform. In his first statement as prime minister‑designate, Al‑Zaidi emphasized continuity and pragmatism, declaring that the upcoming government program would complement previous efforts to improve service delivery and social conditions, while pledging to position Iraq as a balanced country regionally and internationally.

Al‑Zaidi’s nomination arrives at a moment of extraordinary regional volatility. Iraq finds itself caught in the crossfire of an escalating U.S.‑Iran confrontation, with Iranian‑backed militias launching hundreds of attacks on American interests since the outbreak of wider conflict in February 2026. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has repeatedly warned of imminent threats from these groups, while Tehran insists that Iraq’s leadership choices must remain purely based on the decision of Iraqis. On the potential stabilizing side, Al‑Zaidi’s economic background may appeal to international donors and investors seeking stability over ideology. His emergence as a compromise candidate suggests broad, if reluctant, acceptance across Shiite factions, a prerequisite for governing effectively. By selecting a figure less overtly aligned with Tehran than Maliki, the Coordination Framework may be signaling openness to renewed dialogue with Washington. Yet persistent risks remain. Al‑Zaidi’s association with a sanctioned bank raises questions about whether the Trump administration will extend full cooperation to his government. The continued political weight of Iran‑aligned armed groups within the framework could constrain Al‑Zaidi’s ability to pursue independent security policies. And with the Coordination Framework controlling roughly 162 to 185 of parliament’s 329 seats, Al‑Zaidi will need support from Kurdish and Sunni blocs to pass legislation and approve his cabinet.

Al‑Zaidi’s immediate challenges are formidable. He must assemble a diverse and competent team capable of addressing Iraq’s chronic service deficits, corruption, and unemployment. With oil revenues under pressure from regional conflict, prudent fiscal management will be critical. Balancing relations with both U.S. forces and Iran‑aligned militias requires diplomatic finesse of the highest order. Moreover, many Iraqis demand changes to the political system that has produced repeated cycles of deadlock. The Coordination Framework’s praise for Maliki and al‑Sudani’s decision to step aside, reflecting concern for supreme national interests, suggests an awareness that continued obstruction would risk broader instability. Yet rhetoric alone cannot resolve the structural tensions that have plagued Iraqi politics since 2003.

Ali Al‑Zaidi’s nomination represents not a definitive solution but a provisional opportunity. In a region where miscalculation can trigger escalation, Iraq’s ability to form a functional, inclusive government carries implications far beyond its borders. If Al‑Zaidi can leverage his technocratic credentials to deliver tangible improvements in governance while navigating the treacherous waters of great‑power competition, his premiership could become a modest anchor of stability. If he fails, the consequences could reverberate from Baghdad to Beirut, from Tehran to Washington. For now, the world watches as Iraq attempts to turn a moment of compromise into a foundation for renewal. The stakes could not be higher.

Syria and the "Arab Spring" 2.0

Syria and the "Arab Spring" 2.0

    Friday, December 06, 2024   No comments

The popular uprising that broke in the Southwest Asian and North African, SWANA, in 2011, that transformed the region was frozen ten years later, especially in Syria and Yemen. Syria, after ten years of war, saw some calm since 2021, with the country still divided into three areas of control: one under "Sunni" rebels supported by Turkey and Qatar controlling the northwest, a second under Kurdish control in the northeast supported by the US, and the rest of Syria controlled by the Syrian government supported by Russia and Iran. On November 27 of this year, the calm was shattered when the Turkish backed armed groups regained major cities they lost in 2017-19. The crisis is unlikely to be resolved short of outside strong intervention, which is also unlikely, given that the outside actors are now busy dealing with new crises centers. So, for the foreseeable future, there are two possible paths forward. The various faction will continue to fight, but unlikely that one will prevail over the other two. Alternatively, a reshuffle of the alliances internally will consolidate some power leading to a stalemate, which will force all three sides to negotiate a deal that preserve the gains and interests of all ethnic, religious, sectarian, and ideological groups. That seem to be the realization of some world and regional powers, though not all think they have to give anything to dial down violence.

Erdogan: We hope that the Syrian "opposition" factions will continue their progress.. and the goal is Damascus

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he hopes that the progress of what he called the "opposition" in Syria will continue "without problems," considering that the next "target" after the armed factions took control of Idlib, Hama and Homs, "is Damascus."

Erdogan's words came in press statements, and he added: "We had invited Assad (Syrian President Bashar al-Assad)... and we told him: Let us determine the future of Syria together. Unfortunately, we did not receive a positive response on this issue."

Recently, Syria's permanent representative to the United Nations, Qusay al-Dahhak, confirmed that the terrorist attack on northern Syria could not have been carried out without a green light and a joint Turkish-Israeli operational order paved by repeated Israeli attacks on Syrian territory.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad also confirmed his country's insistence on eradicating terrorism, stressing that terrorists do not represent a people or institutions, but rather the apparatuses that support them.

Foreign Ministers of Iraq, Syria and Iran: Protecting Syria's Security is Necessary to Protect the Security of the Region

The foreign ministers of Iraq, Syria and Iran stressed on Friday that "threatening Syria's security poses a general danger to the stability of the entire region," stressing that "there is no choice but to coordinate, cooperate and consult diplomatically continuously, in order to eliminate all risks of escalation in the region."

In a joint statement following the meeting at the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, the ministers stressed "the seriousness of the events in Syria and their sensitivity to all parties in the region," warning of "the possibility of their expanding dimensions, which will pose a grave danger to the three countries and threaten the security of their peoples and the entire region."

The ministers also urged "the need to mobilize all Arab, regional and international efforts to reach peaceful solutions to the challenges facing the region in general, and Syria in particular."

In addition, the statement stressed "the agreement on the need to continue consultation and coordination between the three countries, follow up on these developments and prepare for any developments in the coming days," and respect for Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity.

They also condemned "terrorism in all its forms and manifestations classified by the Security Council," stressing "collective action to confront it." They also condemned the ongoing Israeli attacks on Syria, Gaza and Lebanon.

Sistani to the UN representative: We regret the international community's inability to stop the Israeli aggression on Gaza and Lebanon

Sistani to the UN representative: We regret the international community's inability to stop the Israeli aggression on Gaza and Lebanon

    Monday, November 04, 2024   No comments

The highest religious authority in Iraq, Sayyid Ali al-Sistani, stressed today, Monday, the prevention of foreign interventions in all its forms, while expressing his regret for the inability of the international community and its institutions to impose effective solutions to stop the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and Lebanon.

Sayyid al-Sistani received the representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and head of its mission in Iraq (UNAMI) Mohammed al-Hassan and his accompanying delegation. In a statement issued by Sayyid al-Sistani's office, he said that "Sayyid provided a brief explanation of the tasks of the international mission and the role it seeks to play in the coming period. In return, he welcomed the presence of the United Nations in Iraq and wished its mission success in carrying out its tasks."

Sayyid al-Sistani added that "Iraqis - especially the conscious elites - should learn from the experiences they have gone through and do their utmost to overcome their failures and work hard to achieve a better future for their country in which everyone enjoys security, stability, progress and prosperity."

He also stressed that "this cannot be achieved without preparing scientific and practical plans to manage the country based on the principle of competence and integrity in assuming positions of responsibility, preventing foreign interventions in all their aspects, and enforcing the rule of law."

Regarding the volatile situations in our region, Mr. Sistani expressed his "deep sorrow over the ongoing tragedy in Lebanon and Gaza and his deep regret over the inability of the international community and its institutions to impose effective solutions to stop it or at the very least to neutralize civilians from the tragedies of the fierce aggression practiced by the Israeli entity."

For his part, the United Nations representative in Iraq, Mohammed Al-Hassan, confirmed today, Monday, that any infringement on the status of the supreme religious authority represented by Sayyid Ali al-Sistani cannot be accepted.

Al-Hassan said during a press conference following his meeting with Sayyid al-Sistani in Najaf, Iraq: "I was honored to meet His Eminence Sayyid al-Sistani, and I listened to his wisdom and visions for the region and Iraq."

He added, "You know the status of the Sayyid in the Islamic and international worlds, and I am happy with this meeting, and I agreed with His Eminence to work together to enhance the status of Iraq."

Al-Hassan also noted that "Sayyid al-Sistani asked him to implement priorities in the interests of Iraq," expecting that "Iraq will strengthen its relations with its neighbors."

He also stated that "the United Nations is committed to supporting Iraq's priorities and does not interfere except in consultation."

It is noteworthy that Israeli sources published, last month, pictures of leaders Israel assassinated or plans to assassinate and included Sayyid Ali al-Sistani in the list, which angered the Iraqi government.

   

Israel is normalizing the assassination of religious leaders by targeting Sistani

Israel is normalizing the assassination of religious leaders by targeting Sistani

    Wednesday, October 09, 2024   No comments

Channel close to Netanyahu included Sistani on Israeli assassination list. Channel 14 Israel published a photo of the highest Shiite authority in Iraq, Ali al-Sistani, as one of the targets of Israeli assassination plans.

The photo of al-Sistani appeared alongside photos of the leader of the Houthi Ansar Allah group, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, Naim Qassem, deputy secretary-general of the Lebanese Hezbollah, Yahya Sinwar, head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Esmail Qaani, commander of the Quds Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The Israeli channel, which is close to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, broadcast the photos yesterday, Tuesday, with the word “target” over the head of each of the aforementioned figures, without explaining the reasons for placing al-Sistani on the assassination list.

The photos appeared while one of the right-wing channel’s correspondents was talking about the possible Israeli response to the missile attack launched by Iran on Israel last Tuesday.

The correspondent said during his interview accompanying the photos that Israel "has made a decision to strike Iran, but the targets that will be attacked have not yet been determined," and he also indicated that the date of the possible Israeli response has not yet been determined either.

He said that unless a decision is made regarding the determination of targets and the date of the response, all possibilities are possible.

Israel has not previously spoken about the assassination of Sistani, although a number of its officials have mentioned the names of all the other figures whose pictures were shown on the channel as potential targets on the Israeli assassination list.

Sistani, who was born in 1930, is a religious authority for the fundamentalist Twelver Shiites and resides in the city of Najaf in central Iraq, which is the center of the main religious science schools known as the "Najaf Seminary," and he is one of the most influential figures in the country due to his broad religious authority. His name might have been added to Israel's assassination list due to his statements about the assassination of the Lebanese leader of Hezbollah. Sistani issued a statement, then, saying that "Martyr Nasrallah is a leadership model that is unparalleled in recent decades"

In his official statement he added: "We received with great sorrow and regret the news of the martyrdom of the great scholar, the hujjat al-Islam and Muslims, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, and a group of his brothers in the honorable Lebanese resistance, and dozens of innocent civilians in the horrific massacre committed by the Zionist enemy army in the beloved suburb of Beirut."

He added, "The great martyr was a leadership model that was rarely seen in recent decades. He played a distinguished role in the victory over the Zionist occupation by liberating Lebanese lands and supported the Iraqis with everything he could in liberating their country from the ISIS terrorists. He also took great positions in support of the oppressed Palestinian people until he paid his precious life as a price for that." He added, "As we offer our sincere condolences and deepest sympathy to the noble Lebanese people and all oppressed peoples in this great loss and affliction, we implore God Almighty to bestow His vast mercy and satisfaction upon the deceased and to unite him with His saints, Muhammad and his pure family, in the highest heavens, and to inspire his family and all those who are grieving his loss with patience and solace. To God we belong and to Him we shall return."

Iraqi government responds

In the first reactions, the Iraqi government said that it rejects in the strongest terms any infringement on the status of the supreme religious authority.

The spokesman for the Iraqi government, Bassem Al-Awadi, stressed in an official government statement that "after the Zionist entity has gone too far in its genocidal war, committed blatant crimes against humanity, and openly practiced murder and aggression in Gaza and Lebanon, it is the turn of its inciting and racist media, in a cheap attempt to harm the image of the supreme religious authority."

He added, "the Iraqi government rejects in the strongest terms any infringement on the status of our authority, which is appreciated and respected by all the Iraqi people, the Arab and Islamic worlds, and the international community, and warns of the danger of these attempts based on a racist intellectual background, and foundations that have gone too far in disregarding the sanctities of peoples, which encourages the expansion of the circle of aggression and exposes international security and peace to a real threat."

He continued, "the Zionist entity proves, once again, that it is nothing but a criminal group that thrives on fabricating crises, feeding aggression and wars, and its isolation increases day after day, and the popular and international positions in the world rejecting its behavior are nothing but confirmation of this aggressive trend."

Based on these facts, the Iraqi government- according to the statement - "call on the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and all international and UN forums, to reject and denounce everything that affects the feelings of Muslims in the world, and attempts to undermine figures with global influence and respect."

The statement explained that Iraq, government and people, have made every effort to stop the war, but Israel and its extremist government, in addition to the failure of the international community, have caused the situation to worsen, and today it is trying to spread insults to cover up the clear crimes, which we reject in general, and consider it a dangerous aggression that will not change Iraq's firm and principled position on all fateful issues.

The US troops in Iraq are there to stay unless the US government chooses to pull them out

The US troops in Iraq are there to stay unless the US government chooses to pull them out

    Sunday, February 25, 2024   No comments

 Since the 1990 US intervention in Iraq and the UNSC action after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, Iraq lost control of its economy and that has not changed. The Iraqi government recently asked the US to schedule full withdrawal of the latter’s troops. That is unlikely to happen unless the US needs or wants to pull troops out, because the US maintains tight control over the Iraqi economy which is entirely dependent on oil. Revenues from the sale of Iraqi oil is processed by US banks and the US government is leveraging it to keep troops in Iraq. 

Member of the Finance Committee in the Iraqi Parliament, Jamal Kujar, confirmed that there are three economic files that the United States uses to pressure Iraq, namely the oil file, Iraqi funds in the US Treasury, and the dollar file, and that the release of Iraqi funds in the US Federal Bank has become conditional in accordance with American controls and specifications.

 Koger explained, “These files represent strong and influential pressure cards if used against Iraq, because the Iraqi economy is fragile and depends entirely on oil revenues at a rate of up to 94% of the gross national product.”

 Oil export revenues in 2023, according to data issued by the Ministry of Oil last January, amounted to about 87.6 billion dollars, at a rate of about 7.3 billion dollars per month. The country sold more than 1.23 billion barrels.

 Iraqi funds deposited with the US Federal Bank from oil export revenues, which is a procedure applied within the requirements of Chapter Seven of the United Nations procedures following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and is still in effect, in addition to the inclusion of new Iraqi companies and banks on the sanctions list it issues.

 

Amman Consultative Meeting Statement: For the exit of illegal foreign forces from Syria

Amman Consultative Meeting Statement: For the exit of illegal foreign forces from Syria

    Monday, May 01, 2023   No comments

Summary:

- Cooperation between Damascus, the concerned countries, and the United Nations in developing a comprehensive strategy to combat terrorism in all its forms and organizations.

- The need for illegal foreign forces to leave Syrian soil.

- The need to deliver humanitarian and medical aid to the Syrian people.

- Working on ending the presence of armed and terrorist groups on Syrian soil.

- Cooperation of #Syria, #Jordan and #Iraq to locate and identify the sources of drug production and smuggling methods.

- Provide appropriate conditions in #Syria for the voluntary and safe return of refugees.

________________

Review of the meeting:

The final statement of the consultative meeting of the foreign ministers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, with the Syrian Foreign Minister, Faisal Al-Miqdad, held in the Jordanian capital, Amman, affirmed the priority of ending the Syrian crisis and all the suffering it caused to the Syrian people.

The statement stressed the need to end the negative repercussions of the crisis, regionally and internationally, through "a political solution that preserves Syria's unity, cohesion and sovereignty, meets the aspirations of its people, rids it of terrorism, and contributes to strengthening the appropriate conditions for the voluntary and safe return of refugees."

The statement called for a political solution to the crisis to lead to "the exit of all illegal foreign forces from it, to achieve national reconciliation, and to restore Syria's security, stability, health and role."

The statement called for the delivery of humanitarian and medical aid that contributes to meeting the life needs of all those who need it among the Syrian people, in all their places of residence, stressing that it is a necessity that all efforts must be combined to meet, in cooperation and coordination between the Syrian government and the relevant United Nations bodies, and in accordance with the decisions relevant United Nations.

The ministers participating in the consultative meeting welcomed the Syrian government's decision to open the Bab al-Salama and al-Rai crossings for the United Nations to deliver humanitarian and medical aid, after the earthquake that struck Syria on February 6.

The priority of the return of the displaced Syrians

The statement touched on the voluntary and safe return of Syrian refugees to their country, stressing that it is a top priority and the necessary steps must be taken to start implementing it immediately.

He also called for strengthening cooperation between the Syrian government and countries hosting refugees, and coordination with the relevant United Nations bodies, to organize voluntary and safe returns for refugees and end their suffering, according to specific procedures and a clear time frame, provided that the Syrian government begins by identifying the necessary needs to improve public services provided in areas of refugee return.

The statement called for intensified work with the international community and the United Nations to accelerate the implementation of early recovery projects for Syria, in a way that contributes to stabilization, and that steps be taken, as appropriate, to resolve the issue of the internally displaced, including the issue of the Rukban camp.

The statement referred to cooperation between the Syrian government and the Jordanian government, in coordination with the relevant United Nations bodies, in organizing a voluntary return of about a thousand Syrian refugees in Jordan.

The need to end the existence of various terrorist organizations

The meeting statement stressed the need for cooperation between the Syrian government, the concerned countries and the United Nations, in developing a comprehensive strategy to enhance security and combat terrorism in all its forms and organizations, and to end the presence of terrorist organizations in the Syrian territories, and neutralize their ability to threaten regional and international security.

In addition to affirming work to support Syria and its institutions in any legitimate efforts to achieve "extending its control over its lands, imposing the rule of law, and ending the presence of armed and terrorist groups on its lands," calling for stopping external interference in Syrian internal affairs, and for establishing effective coordination mechanisms between the military and security agencies. Syria and its counterparts in neighboring countries.

The statement called for work to resume the work of the Constitutional Committee, as soon as possible, in the context of political steps aimed at achieving comprehensive national reconciliation.

The meeting discussed the humanitarian aspect, and the steps required to achieve progress in efforts to address it, in a way that will directly affect the Syrian people, in addition to a number of security and political issues.

The foreign ministers also agreed with their Syrian counterpart on the agenda of the talks, which will continue according to a timetable to be agreed upon, according to the statement, and on the formation of a technical team at the level of experts, which will follow up on the outcomes of this meeting and determine the next steps.

The Jordanian Foreign Minister, Ayman Safadi, and his Syrian counterpart discussed efforts to launch an Arab leadership role to reach a political solution to the Syrian crisis and bilateral relations prior to the Amman Consultative Meeting.

Shamkhani’s February activities are now being revealed: directing a foreign policy linked to long term economic security

Shamkhani’s February activities are now being revealed: directing a foreign policy linked to long term economic security

    Thursday, April 06, 2023   No comments

Media reports are now revealing that Iran’s top security official Ali Shamkhani and Russian President Vladimir Putin had extensive talks on de-dollarization of trade between the two sanction-hit countries during Shamkhani’s visit to Moscow earlier this year.

Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency covered the report after it was released late on Wednesday and said that the hours-long, off-the-record meeting between Shamkhani and Putin early February was mostly focused on initiatives to offset the impacts of Western sanctions on Iran and Russia, including efforts to ditch the US dollar from bilateral trade.

 It said the two had agreed that Iran and Russia could increase the share of other major currencies, including the Chinese yuan, the Emirati dirham and the Indian rupee, in their foreign exchange reserves.

 The report said that the agreement was a base for Shamkhani’s following consultations in China, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq to boost Iran’s access to international trade.

 Shamakhani had traveled to Moscow to attend a regional summit on Afghanistan. The former navy commander, who leads Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, then reached a deal in early March in Beijing with his Saudi counterpart Musaad bin Mohammed Al-Aiban to revive diplomatic ties between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

 Shamkhani also traveled to Abu Dhabi and Baghdad last month in visits that many said were aimed at boosting Iran’s economic ties with its two Arab neighbors.

 

The role of the UN and the UNSC in preventing conflict

The role of the UN and the UNSC in preventing conflict

    Saturday, April 01, 2023   No comments

The role of the UN and the UNSC in preventing conflict is non-existent because of its lack of independence from Western hegemony.

UN spokesperson Farhan Haq was asked if the US military presence in Syria is illegal. Listen and watch his answer.

Substitute the questions about Syria with same questions about the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and you get your answers why the world is not up in arms against the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Only the West is, but it was the West that made such actions acceptable.

There Will be no Bakhmut Left for anyone to Keep or Liberate

There Will be no Bakhmut Left for anyone to Keep or Liberate

    Monday, March 27, 2023   No comments

The battle for the city of Bakhmut is not a battle for the city at all. Because there will be no city after the battle. That is one of the reasons why armed actors who seek shelter among civilians and fires from near their homes are committing a war crime according to international treaties. 

Although far from traditional homeland of Islam, here too, the Mosque stand witness to the recklessness and cruelty of war. A tank that appears to belong to the armed forces of Ukraine is stationed near what is left of a damaged mosque and firing.

There are many reasons why Ukrainian leaders are choosing to make a stand in the city of Bakhmut and not retreat. Perhaps one of the reasons is how they can use homes of civilians and their mosques and ch

urches as shield while they battle with the Russians. They want these cities and towns destroyed if they cannot be preserved under their control. That is criminal intent.

Urban warfare is not a neutral category. Urban warfare, when it is done intentionally, when an army or an armed group decides to engage in war activities from near mosques, hospitals, and other civilian structures, they are committing a war crime. 

   

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, the Iraqi army collapsed very quickly. For civilians, especially those in large cities such as Baghdad, that was a good thing. The collapse of the Iraqi military spared large cities from complete destruction. 

But not all Iraqi cities avoided urban warfare. The fate of Fallujah comes to mind. Since the invasion, the city of Fallujah did not actually fall under the total control of the coalition forces. In fact, a year after the invasion, US troops tried to flush out pockets of armed rebels who took the city, especially the old city with its narrow walkways and dense neighborhoods as shield. From April 1 to May 1, 2004, US troops fought running battles with the armed groups. Knowing the cost of urban warfare is high for all sides, US troops decided to leave the city alone. That was the end of the First Battle of Fallujah. That retreat encouraged fighters from inside Iraq and outside Iraq, mostly fighters affiliated with al-Qaeda, to settle in Fallujah and use it as a base for their attacks. That brought back the coalition forces, this time, they were determined to liberate the city even if that meant its full destruction. 

From the first week of November to right before Christmas Eve of 2004, American, Iraqi, and British troops battled with armed groups in the city in what was officially called Operation al-Fajr, popularly known and the Second Battle of Fallujah. In the end, 710 coalition forces were killed or wounded and more than 3,000 rebels were killed or captured. But we may never know how many civilians, out of the more than quarter million residents of the city were killed or injured. That number was estimated to be in the thousands, to add to the estimate total number of 650,000 civilians who were killed in Iran during the invasion. As if two battles were not enough, when ISIL took over large territories in Syrian and Iraq, Fallujah falls back into urban violence once more.

If images of city buildings were an indication of the level of destruction urban warfare can bring, the images of the destroyed homes and mosques tell a story of unlivable devastation—the City of Mosques was reduced to a City of Ruin.

 The same applies to the urban warfare that took place in Syrian and is now taking place in Ukraine. 

Brokered by Chinese diplomacy, National Security Apparatuses in Iran and Saudi Arabia greenlight the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two countries

Brokered by Chinese diplomacy, National Security Apparatuses in Iran and Saudi Arabia greenlight the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two countries

    Friday, March 10, 2023   No comments

China’s quiet diplomacy in the Middle East turned a low-level conflict with Iran into a consequential development that could change the trajectory of region.

For months and years, Iraq and Oman have been working hard to bring the two regional powers to a point where they will be able to talk to each other directly. Nothing happened. Within weeks, and since the Chinese president’s visit to Saudi Arabia, China relied on its excellent relations with Iran and exploited Saudi Arabia’s interest in an Asia pivot to bring these countries together. 

Direct and meaningful talks between Iran and Saudi Arabia will have secondary effects on the ongoing conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Afghanistan.

*****

Following Iranian President Ayatollah Ebrahim Raisi's visit to Beijing last February, Admiral Shamkhani began intensive talks with his Saudi counterpart on Monday, in order to finally resolve issues between Tehran and Riyadh.

And he announced in a joint statement that Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed to resume bilateral relations. As it was stated at the conclusion of the completed talks between the two countries, that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia agreed to resume diplomatic relations and reopen embassies and representations within two months.

At the conclusion of these talks, a tripartite statement was issued today, Friday, in Beijing, signed by Ali Shamkhani, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Musaed bin Muhammad Al-Aiban, the Saudi Minister of State, Advisor to the Council of Ministers and National Security Adviser, and Fang Yi, a member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party and Chairman. Office of the CPC Central Committee on Foreign Affairs and member of the Government Council of the People's China.

The statement said, in response to the worthy initiative of Mr. Xi Jinping, President of the People's Republic of China, to support the strengthening of relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and based on the principle of good neighborliness and in view of his agreement with the presidents of the two countries to host and support dialogue between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as the desire the two countries sought to resolve differences through dialogue and diplomacy based on fraternal ties, and affirming the two countries' adherence to the principles and objectives of the United Nations Charter, the Charter of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and international principles and procedures. Musaed bin Mohammed Al-Aiban, Minister of State, Cabinet Member and National Security Adviser, in Beijing, from March 6-10, 2023.

He added, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia express their gratitude to the Republic of Iraq and the Sultanate of Oman for hosting the talks between the two sides in the years (2021 to 2022) and the leadership and government of the People's Republic of China for hosting and supporting the talks that took place in this country and the efforts made to make them a success.

He continued, as a result of the completed talks, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia agreed to resume diplomatic relations and reopen embassies and representations within two months.

The statement said that the foreign ministers of the two countries will meet to implement this decision and make the necessary arrangements for the exchange of ambassadors.

The two countries affirmed respect for sovereignty and non-interference in each other's internal affairs, within the framework of implementing the security cooperation agreement signed on 4/17/2001 as well as the general economic, trade and investment agreement and technical, scientific, cultural, sports and youth cooperation signed on 5/27/1998.

The statement indicated that the three countries declare their firm determination to employ all efforts to promote peace and security at the regional and international levels.

These developments came just days from the breaking news of a visit by Iran's national security chief to a foreign country. The cryptic news bulletin did not mention the country or offer any other context. It mere stated that:

News sources reported that Admiral Ali Shamkhani held very important talks in a foreign country during the past few days.

And Tasnim International News Agency reported that the Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council held very important talks in a foreign country over the past few days.

According to news sources, the imminent announcement of the results of these talks will cause important developments.

Then came the major announcement:

An Iranian-Saudi agreement to resume diplomatic relations and open embassies

In a joint statement, Iran and Saudi Arabia announced the agreement to resume dialogue and diplomatic relations, and to reopen embassies in the two countries within two months.

According to the joint statement, "the resumption of dialogue between Tehran and Riyadh comes in response to the Chinese president's initiative," during Iranian-Saudi meetings and negotiations that took place between March 6 and 10 in Beijing.

The two countries expressed their appreciation for China's hosting and support for the recent talks, and their gratitude to Iraq and the Sultanate of Oman for hosting the talks between the two sides during the years 2021 and 2022.

According to the statement, Tehran and Riyadh affirmed the principle of respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of the two countries, and the implementation of the security cooperation agreement signed in 2001.

Iran, Saudi Arabia and China announced their intention to use all diplomatic efforts to promote regional and international peace and security.

And Ali Shamkhani, Secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, stated that he had conducted intensive negotiations with his Saudi counterpart to resolve the outstanding issues between the two countries once and for all.

Shamkhani added that Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi's visit to China led to "new and very serious" negotiations between the delegations of Iran and Saudi Arabia.

He stressed that removing misunderstandings and looking towards the future in relations between Riyadh and Tehran "will certainly lead to strengthening regional security," expressing his appreciation for China's constructive role in supporting the development of relations between countries to enhance the level of international cooperation.

Shamkhani pointed out that the five rounds of negotiations that took place in Iraq and Oman were influential in reaching the final agreement in Beijing, appreciating the efforts of the two countries.

The foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia will meet to implement this agreement and make the necessary arrangements for the exchange of ambassadors soon.

*****

Since Xi's visit, observers became interested in China's role in the region asking if Will Beijing succeed in playing the role of mediator between Tehran and the Gulf states?

They noted that it is in China's interest to ease tensions between Iran and the Gulf states to ensure energy security and the success of the "Belt and Road" initiative, but it is not easy to succeed in that, as the United States of America will not allow the success of the Chinese initiative to improve relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

*****

Before Raisi's visit to China, they noted that the Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi will visit China at the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping from February 14 to 16, and will meet his Chinese counterpart, in their second meeting after their first meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Organization summit in Uzbekistan last September. . This will be the first visit of an Iranian president to China since his election in 2021, and he will also be the first head of state to visit China in the Chinese New Year.

The Kuwaiti newspaper "Al-Jarida" had published several days ago an article in which it stated that preparations were underway for an upcoming visit by the Iranian president to Beijing. The day after the news was published, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani revealed President Raisi's upcoming visit to China.

The visit of the Iranian president to China comes after the statement of the Chinese-Gulf summit, which dealt with the disputed islands between Iran and the United Arab Emirates and the Iranian nuclear agreement, displeased Tehran, which summoned the Chinese ambassador there, and expressed its deep disturbance at what was stated in the summit statement.

In turn, the Chinese ambassador stressed his country's respect for Iran's territorial integrity, and considered that the goal of the Chinese president's visit to Riyadh is to balance relations, support peace and stability in the region, and use dialogue as a tool to solve problems.

To ease Tehran's anger, Beijing sent Chinese Vice Premier Hu Chunhua to Iran, who, during his meeting with the Iranian president, stressed China's determination to develop its comprehensive strategic partnership with Iran.

And during the month in which the Chinese president visited Saudi Arabia, a Chinese consulate was opened in the Bandar Abbas region, and it voted against removing Iran from the United Nations Women's Committee.

"The resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a 'victory' for dialogue and peace," Chinese Foreign Minister Chen Wangyi said on Friday.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry quoted Wang as saying at the conclusion of the dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Iran that the resumption of relations is "great good news" in the current turbulent world.

Wang added that China will continue to play a constructive role in dealing with thorny issues in the world today and will show its "responsibility" as a major country.

Saudi Foreign Minister on the agreement with Iran: Our countries share one destiny and common denominators

Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan said, "The resumption of relations between Riyadh and Tehran stems from our vision based on favoring political solutions."

Bin Farhan added that the countries of the region "are united by one destiny and common denominators, which make it necessary for us to participate together in building a model of prosperity and stability."

For his part, Musaed Al-Aiban, Saudi National Security Adviser, said that Saudi Arabia welcomes the Chinese president's initiative to develop relations between the Kingdom and Iran.

Al-Aiban pointed out that "the Saudi-Iranian agreement is the culmination of the discussions that took place during the current week," stressing that Riyadh was keen to make the agreement with Iran within the framework of fraternal ties, and was also keen to open a new page and adhere to international covenants.

According to the Saudi National Security Adviser, "The Saudi-Iranian agreement is a pillar in the development of relations between countries and the promotion of stability in the region."

As for the Iranian side, the Secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, said that the recent visit of the Iranian President, Ebrahim Raisi, to China provided the basis for the formation of new and serious negotiations between the delegations of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Shamkhani added that the talks between the two countries were frank, transparent, comprehensive and constructive, indicating that removing misunderstandings and looking to the future in relations between Tehran and Riyadh will lead to the development of regional stability and security, and increase cooperation between the Gulf states and the Islamic world regarding managing existing challenges.

The visit also comes at a time of raging conflict between China and the United States of America, and the US Secretary of State postponing his visit to Beijing after the balloon crisis and the subjection of Iranian and Chinese companies to US sanctions.

US official reaction:

Reacting to the news,  a White House spokesman confirms that Washington is aware of reports about the resumption of diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and the communications coordinator in the US National Security Council, John Kirby, said: We welcome any efforts that help end the war in Yemen and reduce tension in the Middle East.

As for the American media, the Wall Street Journal considered that the agreement between the two countries represents a "diplomatic victory for Beijing, in a region where the United States has long dominated geopolitics."

Reactions from the region:

The former occupation prime minister, Naftali Bennett, attacked the current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, against the background of the Iran-Saudi agreement, noting that it was "a resounding failure, stemming from the combination of political neglect, general weakness, and an internal conflict in the state."

Bennett pointed out that "the resumption of relations is a dangerous and dangerous development for Israel, and represents a political victory for Iran."

On the official Arab level, the Sultanate of Oman said: "We hope that the resumption of Saudi-Iranian relations will contribute to strengthening the pillars of security and stability in the region and consolidating positive and constructive cooperation that benefits all peoples of the region and the world."

The Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs welcomed the agreement reached between the two countries.

The Foreign Ministry indicated that "the efforts made by the Iraqi government in this context, through Baghdad hosting the dialogue rounds between the two sides, and the solid base it established for the dialogues that followed through the Sultanate of Oman and the People's Republic of China, leading to the moment of agreement, which will be reflected in the integration of relations between the two sides, and give A qualitative impetus in the cooperation of the countries of the region, with the aim of a framework that fulfills the aspirations of all parties and heralds the launch of a new phase.