Media Review: The world mourns 6 dead and ignores 40,000 dead--Haaretz

Media Review: The world mourns 6 dead and ignores 40,000 dead--Haaretz

    Thursday, September 05, 2024   No comments

Israel and the world are mourning the six Israeli detainees who were killed, and their names, photos, life stories and families are making the news, even though they are only the tip of the iceberg of the war in Gaza, and only a small part of its victims. This is how Gideon Levy began his column in Haaretz, saying sarcastically that Hirsch Goldberg Polin and Eden Yerushalmi became celebrities despite their captivity and after their death, just as the world mourned the dead Israeli prisoners, “How could it not be when they were six beautiful young men who went through the hell of captivity before being brutally executed,” Levy added.

Levy was surprised by the astonishing contradiction between the wide coverage of their lives and deaths, and the ignoring of the similar fate of people of their age who are no less innocent, honest and beautiful, and who represent innocent victims on the Palestinian side.

Although the world is shocked by the fate of Gaza, it has never shown similar respect for the Palestinian victims. Neither US President Joe Biden has invited the relatives of the Palestinians who were martyred, even if they hold American citizenship, like the Goldberg and Pullins families, nor has the United States demanded the release of the thousands of kidnapped Palestinians who are being held by Israel without trial.

It is strange that a young Israeli woman killed at the Nova Festival arouses more sympathy and compassion in the world than a teenage refugee from Jabalia, as Levy says, commenting that Israelis are more like “the world.”

They also have names and hopes

If everything has been said about the neglect and concealment of the suffering of the Palestinians in the Israeli public discourse, what has been said is not enough - according to Levy - because the Palestinian killed in Gaza had a face, a name and a life story, and because the 17,000 children killed in the Strip since the beginning of the war also had hopes, dreams and families destroyed by their deaths.

However, the deaths of these people do not matter to the majority of Israelis, and some even rejoice in them, while the world outside Israel views them as horrible victims who have no names or faces, which is astonishing and indicates a loss of humanity, according to the writer.

It is not difficult - as Levy says - to imagine the feelings of the people of Gaza in the face of a world shaken by the deaths of 6 Israeli detainees without any interest in the 40,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza, and without any talk about the non-Israeli detainees.

"What about the hundreds and thousands of Palestinian abductees from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank? What about the administrative detainees who are being held without trial? What about the 'illegal combatants' and innocent workers who were caught and are being held in hellish conditions?" the writer asked.

They too, says Gideon Levy, have anxious families who do not know what has happened to them for the past 10 months. They too are denied visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross, and some of their stories are no less telling than the video of Eden Yerushalmi, which Hamas released this week.

Source: Haaretz

Media review: Understanding Blinken's assessment of when Iran will produce a nuclear bomb and Haniyeh's assassination

Media review: Understanding Blinken's assessment of when Iran will produce a nuclear bomb and Haniyeh's assassination

    Friday, August 16, 2024   No comments

What do media reports and political statements about state-sanctioned assassinations and the war in Gaza mean in the big picture?

 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced, Friday July 19th, that Iran is capable of producing fissile material for a nuclear bomb "within a week or two."

Blinken said during a forum in Colorado (west) that "the current situation is not good. Iran, because of the end of the nuclear agreement, instead of being at least a year away from being able to produce fissile material for a nuclear bomb, is now probably a week or two away from being able to do so."

He explained that Tehran "has not developed a weapon yet, but we are watching this matter closely, of course."

Blinken reiterated that "a week or two" is the estimated time for Iran to be able to produce this fissile material for the purpose of making a nuclear bomb.

He said, "What we have seen in recent weeks and months is that Iran is moving forward with this" nuclear program, reiterating the United States' goal of Tehran never having a nuclear weapon, and "preferring the diplomatic path" to achieve this.

CNN, which reported the same news explained breakout time as being "the amount of time needed to produce enough weapons grade material for a nuclear weapon – “is now probably one or two weeks” as Tehran has continued to develop its nuclear program."

The US government statement was made about a month ago, July 18. If that assessment is correct, not only did Iran has more than two weeks to reach that goal, but also was given more reasons to achieve that goal when Israel carried out an attack inside Iran on 31 July 2024, that killed Hamas leader, Ismael Haniyeh who was attending the inauguration of the new president. Blinken assessment is significant for many reasons, including these two important reasons.

If US assessment is true, and given the recent development, by Wednesday August 14th, Iran would have had two weeks since the assassination, above and beyond the two weeks between Blinken's statement and the assassination, which is more than the time it needs to reach the stage per US government.  This means that, now, Iran is past the breakout time, and would have enough "weapons grade material for a nuclear weapon". 

If Iran does not produce "weapons grade material" then US assessment is flawed about Iran's ability or wrong about its intention to do so. 

In both cases, this recent development is bad news for Western governments because their next news cycle will be to address Iran with the reality of it possessing the nuclear material or having it and choosing not to build a nuclear weapons. In both cases, the nuclear threat would have moved past it being a threat, since it will be either a reality or a non-threat.

In the light of the nuclear development matter, Iran's delayed retaliation against Israel for the assassination of a Palestinian political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, could be the most strategic response. Iran would have used the timeline floated by high-ranking US official about the breakout time to either make it irrelevant or to create more uncertainty about Iran's capabilities.

The delay froze any conversation about Iran's nuclear program and perhaps allowed the Iranian leaders to add the nuclear option just in case Israel decides to retaliate against Iran's retaliation. Iran does not have to announce that they have a nuclear weapon at this point; Iran could adopt Israel’s strategic ambiguity about its nuclear capability and that would produce the same deterring effects as announcing that it has a nuclear weapon.

Taken in a broader context, the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, in effect, was the best thing that could have happened for Iran for many reasons.

First, Iran now has the legal and moral ground to act on the principle of self-defense.

Second, by holding official religious prayers for the dead Sunni leader, Iran’s brand of Islam, Shia Islam, is no longer a fringe belief, as it has been portrayed by Saudi Salafists. The fact that Hamas leaders agreed to have two formal prayers, one in Tehran and one in Qatar, is remarkable in the view of experts on Sunni-Shia divide.

Third, Iran’s menu of retaliatory options has become more expansive. Iran could strike inside the 1948 border of Israel, since the attack on Haniyeh took place in Tehran. But Iran could hit targets and military concentrations in Gaza, which will highlight the above stated connections, and refocus attention on the primary objective that most governments around the world want to achieve: a ceasefire in Gaza War. Also, Iran could use a surgical strike against an Israeli leader or a military installation. Lastly, Iran’s leaders could forgo a military tactical strike in favor of a strategic decision to adopt a different nuclear posture and use the assassination as a justification for developing a last resort self-defense nuclear option, something it has been unable to do in the past.

When considered from these advantage points, it is clear that assassination is the least strategic statecraft tool, as it tends to diminish the standing and reputation of the state that rely on assassinations and bolster the strategic position of the state whose sovereignty has been violated--long-term. For these reasons, this event may end up being one of the most significant turning points of the century. 

  

Media review: How did Israel track and assassinate leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah?

Media review: How did Israel track and assassinate leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah?

    Friday, August 02, 2024   No comments

There are many theories now being floated by both government sources and media outlets trying to explain the surgical strikes Israel undertook to assassinate leaders of Hamas and other armed factions. Here is a review of what is now circulating in news outlets and on social media platforms.

Iranian agency: Haniyeh was assassinated by a shell that hit his residence

The Iranian Fars News Agency confirmed that the assassination of the head of the political bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Ismail Haniyeh, was carried out by a shell that hit his residence, destroying part of its roof and windows. 

It added that investigations confirmed that Israel planned and carried out the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh.

The New York Times reported that American officials secretly admitted that Israel assassinated Haniyeh in the Iranian capital, Tehran, yesterday, Wednesday.

The newspaper explained that the American officials’ statement came despite the fact that Israel did not announce its adoption of the assassination and refused to comment on the incident publicly.

In contrast, Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hagari claimed on Thursday that the army did not launch any airstrikes on Iran or any other country in the Middle East on Wednesday.

In response to a question about the assassination of Haniyeh, he said in a press conference, “We did not attack Iran from the air.”

He added, “We killed (the prominent Hezbollah leader) Fouad Shukr in Lebanon, but there was no other Israeli airstrike in the entire Middle East after that.”

However, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards said in a statement that technical investigations show that Haniyeh's assassination was carried out with a short-range projectile with a warhead weighing 7.5 kilograms, fired from outside the place where the martyr Haniyeh lived.

Was a third country involved in the assassination? 

Initially, an Iranian source revealed that the martyrdom of the head of the political bureau of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran "was carried out by a missile launched from one country to another, not from within Iran."

For his part, the spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Nasser Kanaani, confirmed that the relevant Iranian authorities are continuing "the necessary investigations to determine the dimensions and details of this incident."

Kanaani said: "There is no doubt that the pure blood of this mujahid, who spent his life in jihad and honorable struggle against the usurping Zionist entity, and on the path to liberating holy Jerusalem and liberating the Palestinian people, will not go in vain."

He added: "Haniyeh's martyrdom in Tehran will strengthen the deep and solid relations between Iran, Palestine and the resistance even more."

Western Sources' explanations

In parallel, the New York Times and the American website Axios published another story, confirming Israel's responsibility for Haniyeh's assassination, but claiming that the assassination was carried out by an explosive device planted by Mossad agents in his room, and detonated remotely.

Public Data Analasys based explanation

The competing explanations open the door to speculations given the precision and the timing of the assassination. An alternative theory based on available information that is in the public domain suggest that Israel is using the phones of associates to track the persons Israel has placed on its assassination list. Such analysis suggests that, in its recent assassinations, Israel's security forces targeted the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah by tracking the phone numbers of their companions. Because the high value targets who know that they are on the assassination list are not allowed to use mobile phones, Israel was unable to locate and assassinate them in the past. 

However, a security lapse happened after Israel assassinated the children and grandchildren of Ismail Haniyeh few months ago. Hamas sources broadcasted a video of the moment when Haniyeh received the news of the murder of his family members. In the clip, it showed him receiving the call on someone else's phone and listening to it. 

As the primary leader leading the investigation, Haniyeh used his aid's phone to keep in touch with the Qatari leaders. That number was likely used to track Haniyeh's movement.

The same strategy was replicated elsewhere, Israel stopped trying to locate the persons it wanted to assassinate directly, and focused on tracking their aids who are often in close contact with the targeted person.

This theory explains the precision and speed with which Israel carried out the recent assassination.

 Theories that suggest the use of human intelligence and agents presence on the ground cannot explain the speed and precision. The above theory is bolstered by the unusual step taken by the Israeli government limiting the use of phones by government officials, as reported in Israeli media.

Israel distributes special phones to ministers

The Israeli government has decided to distribute satellite phones to ministers and senior officials. The move aims to limit security threats and to ensure that ministers stay connected in the case of damage sustained by the regular communications network during an attack from Iran and Hezbollah. The latter explanation was opined by the media. The government did not comment.

The Maariv newspaper said: "The government is taking an unusual step, for fear that the communications networks will be damaged in an Iranian attack."

  

Media Review: The Impossible Defeat.. Why Did 2,700 Israeli Assassinations Fail to Make Israel Secure?

Media Review: The Impossible Defeat.. Why Did 2,700 Israeli Assassinations Fail to Make Israel Secure?

    Thursday, August 01, 2024   No comments

Israel often claims that it carries out assassinations to ensure Israel's security. Since its founding in 1948, Israel has carried out more assassinations than any other nation-state during the same time period. What has this strategy achieve and why? 

Many observers and experts in global affairs think that assassinations are not a strategy and should not be adopted instead of a national strategy that is necessary for nation-building. A national project cannot be dependent on one or a handful of leaders. If a state-actor relies on assassinations to secure itself, then it cements its status as a renegade entity while fostering the image of the people whose leaders it assassinates as people with legitimate claims. Israel's increased rate of assassination after achieving a stalemate at best with the Palestinians in this recent war erodes its image as a normal nation-state, which defeats the purpose: national security. Aljazeera TV provided some insight into the history and outcomes of Israel's assassinations. 

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

    Thursday, July 25, 2024   No comments

Israeli political leaders may not have wanted to see so many protesters in the street and in congress, but that is what Netanyahu have achived by his visit to the US: For the first time, American public displayed public displeasure with Israeli conduct. This is clear when even the most friendly TV channels, like Foxnews, give a fail review of his performance.

Fox News: Has Netanyahu Lost America?

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is back in Washington, and in his fourth address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, he broke the record of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. For years, he has been a fixture in American and Israeli politics, but that seems to be changing,” Fox News wrote in a report. “Things seemed different today, not just because Netanyahu is a controversial figure who has drawn thousands of anti-Gaza protesters to the streets of Washington, but because he has become increasingly marginalized,” the website added in a report by its correspondent Joshua Keating.

Fox News confirmed that Netanyahu’s speech to Congress offered little indication of a plan to end the war in Gaza, and likely undermined ongoing diplomatic efforts to achieve this. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described Netanyahu’s speech as “the worst presentation by any foreign dignitary before Congress.”

According to the site, Netanyahu’s speech was remarkably defensive, devoting itself more to rebutting criticism of Israel than charting a path forward out of the quagmire it finds itself in.

He continued by recounting the horrors of Hamas’s attacks on October 7, and vowing that Israel would fight until it destroyed the movement’s military capabilities and rule in Gaza “and returned all the captives to their families.” However, these families are not inclined to believe him and are urging him to accept a ceasefire agreement to secure the release of their relatives.

Fox News was surprised by Netanyahu's attack on anti-Israel protesters in the United States, accusing them of being "useful idiots for Iran" and criticizing university presidents, and the site commented sarcastically, "This is likely to be the first speech on Middle East policy that includes a shout-out to the brothers at the University of North Carolina."

The report said, "Netanyahu may have gotten what he wanted today: a standing ovation, even if it was mostly from Republicans. But more than 70% of Israelis now say Netanyahu should resign."

He continued, "In the past, Washington was a safety valve for Netanyahu, a place where he could count on strong support. But today, the magic is gone and the era of the man who mastered verbal acrobatics is over," said Nimrod Novick, a member of the "Israel Policy Forum" and a senior foreign policy adviser to former Prime Minister Shimon Peres.

The Fox News correspondent concluded by saying, "Netanyahu has become accustomed to being a controversial figure in the more than 40 years since he came to Washington. Perhaps he should get used to being an insignificant figure."

Protesters greet Israeli leader inside and outside US Congress

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has harshly criticized pro-Palestinian protesters in the United States, saying, “Iran is funding the protesters… You have officially become useful idiots for Iran.”

Reacting to the Israeli leader's characteraization of Americans protesting what they see as a genocidal war, the Biden administration reacted with dismay. White House officials dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s description of Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran,” calling it “a sad and wrong idea.” White House National Security Adviser John Kirby said they do not find it right that Netanyahu has described Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran.”

Kirby said that the long-running demonstrations in the United States, criticizing the policies of the Netanyahu administration, are a reflection of people's real concerns, adding that "democracy is exactly that."

For his part, US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said, “We recognize that the vast majority of protesters in the United States are not taking their orders from Iran.”

Miller added that they strongly support the right of protesters in the United States to demonstrate, stressing that the vast majority of people who have demonstrated in the streets of Washington since Wednesday in protest of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington are patriotic Americans expressing their opinions, and we support their right to do so.

In response to Netanyahu’s use of the term “idiots” and “morons” to describe the American protesters, Miller said, “As always, I will adopt a rule of not responding to specific things that the Israeli prime minister says.”

Instead of joining thousands of anti-genocide protesters outside, Rashida Tlaib chose to confront Netanyahu in Congress with keffiyeh and 'war criminal' sign

Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib objected to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress on Wednesday, holding him responsible for the genocide in the Gaza Strip. During Netanyahu's speech, Tlaib wore a keffiyeh and a Palestinian flag, and held up a black-and-white sign with the words "War Criminal" on one side and "Guilty of Genocide" on the other.

Trump's hot potato characterization of the Gaza War: Do what you want but do it fast!

Even Trump does not want to handle this hot potato if he wins the election and take over the White House in 2025. He wants this war to end fast, so that he does not want to deal with it.

Former President Donald Trump – one day before meeting Benjamin Netanyahu – called for a swift end to Israel’s war on Gaza and the return of its captives, stating that the US ally is "getting decimated" by bad publicity.

"I want him to finish up and get it done quickly, he’s got to get it done quickly," Trump told Fox News.

"For whatever reason you have Jewish people out there wearing yarmulkes and they’re, you know, pro-Palestine. You’ve never seen anything like this… They’ve got to get this done fast because the world is not taking lightly to it, it’s really incredible."

Presidential candidate Trump did not attribute his demand for an end to Israel's genocide of Palestinians over the past nine months, which has killed over 40,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured more than 100,000. Instead, he attributed his demand to Israel's negative reputation.

Middle East Media Coverage

Media outlets in the Middle East, including those published historically West-friendly nation states in the Gulf (Alkhaleej Online), concluded that the visit caused more damage and achieved nothing. Other outlets, including the Lebanese paper Alakhbar, summarized the visit with this headline, "Half of Democrats Boycott Speech: Israel's 'Sanctity' Is Not Okay", and explained it further in editorials like these.

Amidst a broad boycott by members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, especially from the Democratic Party, the Prime Minister of the occupation, Benjamin Netanyahu, tried to send a message to American officials, stating that the “fate” of the United States is linked to the fate of Israel, and that the two parties are facing one hostile “axis” and are fighting the “same battle,” and therefore, the “victory” of the latter will be a victory for the former. Apart from the “lies” that Netanyahu adopted, especially regarding the number of Palestinian martyrs in Rafah, as he claimed, when asked about the number of civilians killed there, that “no one was killed,” “except for one incident, when shrapnel from a bomb hit a Hamas weapons depot, killing twenty people,” Netanyahu’s speech, according to observers, did not carry anything new, and did not add any changes to the division within the United States regarding the war in Gaza. According to a report published by the Atlantic Council, although Netanyahu only mentioned the Lebanese front relatively quickly in his speech, the “framework” in which he placed the threat posed by Hezbollah seemed striking; he classified the latter as an “existential threat” to Israel, which cannot be separated from “Israel’s struggle against Hamas, the Houthis, and Iran.” According to those who hold this view, one of the possibilities raised is that “the speech aims to pave the way for a ground incursion into southern Lebanon, and to soften global public opinion regarding such a decision.” The report adds that “opening a new active front against Hezbollah would be disastrous for several reasons, both humanitarian and strategic,” noting that “for the besieged (Israeli Defense Forces),” such a scenario “means entering into a large-scale war against a well-armed opponent,” and increases the possibility of the war expanding regionally. In his speech, which lasted about an hour, Netanyahu stressed the need to strengthen American support for Israel and lift the ban on some weapons, considering that “fast-tracking American military aid could greatly accelerate the end of the war in Gaza and help prevent a wider war in the Middle East,” and claiming that “Israel is participating in intensive efforts to secure the release of the hostages.” Regarding his vision for “the day after,” which remains a point of contention between him and Washington, Netanyahu said that he wants “a demilitarized and non-extremist Gaza,” led by Palestinians “who do not seek to destroy Israel.” After focusing on attacking the axis of resistance with all its components, Hamas responded by issuing a statement about the speech, in which it considered that the latter “reflects the depth of Netanyahu’s military, security, and international crisis,” stressing that “his talk about intensive efforts to return the hostages is a complete lie and misleading of Israeli, American, and international public opinion, while he is the one who thwarted all efforts aimed at ending the war and concluding a deal to release prisoners (...) which holds him fully responsible for the repercussions of this position and for the fate of the prisoners in the Gaza Strip.” The movement also stressed that “the war criminal Netanyahu’s perceptions about the future of the Gaza Strip are mere illusions and fantasies that he is trying to market,” considering that “his attack on the axis of resistance reflects the depth of his military and security crisis due to the open fronts.” The movement concluded by calling on the “United Nations,” the “League of Arab States,” and the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation” to “declare their position of rejecting the occupation and working to end it by all means, and to support the steadfastness of our Palestinian people and their resistance.”

At the Capitol complex, protests were held in which thousands of people opposed to the visit of the occupation prime minister and his speech before the joint session of Congress participated, while American media reported that the Secret Service is looking into reports that the demonstrators managed to reach the hotel where Netanyahu is staying in Washington, DC, where they released insects in the hotel and “activated the fire alarms.” These demonstrators had their “share” of the attack in Netanyahu’s speech, in which he described them as “idiots who benefit from Iran” and who are funded by them, claiming that “when the tyrants of Tehran who hang gays from cranes and kill women for not covering their hair praise you, promote you and fund you, you have officially become idiots who benefit from Iran,” he claimed. As for inside the Capitol, approximately 100 Democrats from the House of Representatives and 28 Democrats from the Senate attended, according to a tally conducted by Axios. This means, in practice, that about “half” of the Democrats in both chambers were absent from the speech, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, making the boycott much wider than the one Netanyahu faced in 2015, when 58 Democrats were absent from his speech. However, even some officials who attended the session were keen, in one way or another, to “annoy” Netanyahu and express their opposition to the genocide being committed in Gaza. For example, among the attendees were a number of critics of the occupation prime minister, including progressive Jewish representatives Jamie Raskin (Democrat of Maryland) and Jerry Nadler (Democrat of New York), who was carrying—and sometimes reading—a book titled “The Netanyahu Years,” which criticizes the “failures” of the latter’s rule, in a photo that was widely circulated on social media. Also in attendance was Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American in Congress and a vocal critic of Israel, wearing a keffiyeh and holding a small sign reading “Guilty of Genocide” and “War Criminal.” Today, Netanyahu is expected to meet with former President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, according to a post on his Truth Social platform, in their first meeting since relations between them deteriorated since the 2020 elections. Trump’s post also included: “During my first term, we saw peace and stability in the region, even signing the historic Abraham Accords,” “and we will do it again,” stressing that the wars in Ukraine and Gaza must end through the implementation of the “peace through strength” agenda, adding: “Millions are dying, and Kamala Harris is in no way capable of stopping it.”

+

Consensus of International media outlets: Netanyahu's rhetoric will not garner support without resolving the Gaza crisis

International newspapers focused on the repercussions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech in the US Congress and his pressure on the White House to approve a specific list of weapons in the upcoming presidential elections. The British newspaper "The Times" saw that Netanyahu had resorted for decades to giving a speech in Congress when he was facing a decline in the voting rate, noting that the speech did not provide clear answers to those wondering about victory in the Gaza war and the threats accompanying

She pointed out that "the most difficult thing Netanyahu will have to face after his trip to Washington is the Israeli public, which is accustomed to his speeches."

In the same context, the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" said that Netanyahu's eloquence will not mobilize support for Israel without a final solution to the crisis in Gaza, adding that "Netanyahu's words have no weight since he is in no hurry to free the prisoners and continues to refuse to discuss a clear plan for the day after the war in Gaza."

The newspaper stressed that the Israelis are more interested in the return of the prisoners and the end date of the war, not Netanyahu's popularity at home.

On the Israeli-American relations front, Politico revealed that the delegation accompanying Netanyahu during his visit to Washington is putting pressure on the administration of US President Joe Biden to agree to provide Israel with a specific list of weapons. According to the newspaper, Israel is trying to boost its transfers and weapons stockpile before the presidential elections, and quoted a source familiar with the weapons list as saying that Israel is concerned about the possibility of a larger confrontation with the Lebanese Hezbollah.

In turn, the French newspaper "Le Monde" said in its editorial that Biden has a good chance to save the two-state solution and fight forcefully against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank after announcing that he will not run for the upcoming elections.

Biden has a historic opportunity to match his words with his actions, according to the newspaper, especially since the extremist policy pursued by the ruling coalition in Israel is in stark contrast to the official American position.

As for the American newspaper "New York Times", it focused on a British study that concluded that the death toll and injuries provided by the Ministry of Health in Gaza during the first weeks of the war are credible.

___________
> Content was updated to include media reactions after Wednesday's speech, and subsequent developments.

Sampling reactions on social media, newspapers commentaries, and government officials' statements

Media review: Gaza War, Famine, Israeli troops documenting themselves committing war crimes, and the terrifying war between Hezbollah and Israel

Media review: Gaza War, Famine, Israeli troops documenting themselves committing war crimes, and the terrifying war between Hezbollah and Israel

    Friday, July 05, 2024   No comments

Despite the consequential events happening around the world, Gaza remains the central issue driving the news for the ninth month. Even in national elections in France, UK, and Iran (and the US Nov. elections), candidates were forced to answer questions related to the war in Gaza, and in the UK, many candidates campaigned and won on a platform that put ending the suffering in Gaza on top of the list. Here are some news stories from this week.