Trump, Iran, and the Abraham Accords—A Critical Assessment

Trump, Iran, and the Abraham Accords—A Critical Assessment

    Monday, May 25, 2026   No comments

In framing a potential agreement with Iran as a broader "peace" initiative, President Trump is explicitly linking it to the expansion of the Abraham Accords. As with many of his signature foreign policy efforts, this narrative emphasizes political symbolism over substantive diplomatic groundwork. The linkage is analytically and strategically problematic for several reasons.

1. The nature of the conflict and the proposed "deal"

The United States and Israel launched joint military operations against Iran on February 28, 2026—dubbed Operation Epic Fury—targeting Iranian military infrastructure, leadership, and nuclear facilities. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in the initial strikes, triggering widespread Iranian retaliation across the region. While a temporary ceasefire has been in place since April 8, 2026, brokered by Pakistan, the conflict remains unresolved, with ongoing tensions over the Strait of Hormuz and sporadic exchanges of fire. Consequently, any current negotiations would not constitute a "peace deal" in the traditional sense but rather a de-escalation or sanctions-relief arrangement aimed at stabilizing an active, though paused, conflict.

2. The Abraham Accords were never peace treaties—and remain politically instrumentalized

The original signatories—the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco—had no direct military conflicts with Israel and were geographically distant from the Israeli-Palestinian theater. These agreements were driven by shared strategic interests, particularly counterbalancing Iranian influence, rather than a comprehensive vision for regional peace. Crucially, the Accords deliberately decoupled normalization from progress on Palestinian statehood. Both Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have consistently refused to recognize Palestinian sovereignty, a stance that underscores the Accords' political rather than peacebuilding nature.

Saudi Arabia has repeatedly conditioned any normalization on a credible, internationally backed pathway to Palestinian statehood. This position has gained momentum as numerous Western nations formally recognized Palestine throughout 2025. In September 2025, the United Kingdom, France, Portugal, Luxembourg, and Malta announced recognition during a high-level conference at the UN General Assembly. Canada and Australia also declared their intent to recognize Palestine around the same time. Mexico had announced recognition earlier, in February 2025. As of late 2025, over 157 UN member states—more than 81% of the General Assembly—recognize the State of Palestine.

The United States remains a notable exception. Despite congressional resolutions urging recognition of a demilitarized Palestinian state consistent with a two-state solution, the Trump administration has maintained its longstanding refusal to extend formal recognition. Pakistan—recently "mandatorily requested" by Trump to join the Abraham Accords—has publicly rejected the demand, stating that the issues of Iran and normalization are "not interlinked and cannot be made so." Without U.S. and Israeli recognition of Palestinian statehood, a genuine regional peace framework remains unattainable.

3. Countries considering normalization fall into three distinct categories regarding Palestine:

Category	Description	Examples
Strategic pragmatists	Prioritize economic ties, security cooperation, and counterbalancing Iran over Palestinian statehood; joined the Accords without preconditions.	UAE, Bahrain, Morocco
Conditional normalizers	Maintain that normalization must follow a credible two-state solution; view Palestinian sovereignty as non-negotiable for long-term stability.	Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt (though already diplomatically tied to Israel)
Post-two-state realists	Argue that settlement expansion and fragmentation have rendered the two-state model unworkable; some analysts and civil society groups now explore single-state frameworks, though no sovereign state officially endorses this as policy.	Growing analytical position; no UN member state openly adopts it

4. Trump's unique—but unlikely—leverage

Ironically, only President Trump is uniquely positioned to make the second path viable. Serving his second and constitutionally final term, he is insulated from electoral consequences and has historically prioritized legacy-building over diplomatic caution. His administration's leverage over Israel—combined with his transactional approach—could theoretically pressure Netanyahu to accept a sovereign Palestinian state. Yet this remains highly improbable. Trump has never publicly endorsed Palestinian statehood; his past policies consistently favored Israeli settlement expansion while marginalizing Palestinian political aspirations. His recent "mandatory request" that six Muslim-majority nations join the Abraham Accords en masse—while simultaneously negotiating with Iran—reflects a preference for grandiose political framing over the incremental, trust-based diplomacy that sustainable peace requires.

Linking an Iran de-escalation agreement to the Abraham Accords may serve short-term political messaging, but it risks undermining both objectives. A durable regional framework requires addressing the Palestinian question directly—not sidestepping it. The wave of Western recognition of Palestine in 2025 signals growing international consensus that Palestinian self-determination is central to regional stability. Without a credible U.S. commitment to that principle, normalization agreements will remain tactical alignments rather than foundations for lasting peace.

OIC Condemns Israel's West Bank Annexation Plans in Emergency Session

OIC Condemns Israel's West Bank Annexation Plans in Emergency Session

    Friday, February 27, 2026   No comments

JEDDAH — The Organization of Islamic Cooperation has issued a strong condemnation of Israel's recent moves to designate large swaths of the occupied West Bank as "state property," characterizing the actions as a de facto annexation and a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.

The declaration emerged from an emergency meeting of OIC foreign ministers held at the organization's headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Diplomats from across the Muslim world gathered to formulate a unified response to what they described as escalating Israeli violations in Palestinian territories.

In their final statement, member states declared the Israeli measures "null and void" and called upon the international community, particularly the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council, to uphold their responsibilities in preserving regional stability. The statement emphasized that unilateral actions altering the status of occupied territories undermine the foundations of peace and the rights of the Palestinian people.

The ministers also addressed recent remarks by the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, describing them as provocative and without legal or historical foundation. The OIC reaffirmed that such statements cannot alter the legal status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory nor diminish the fundamental rights of Palestinians or the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states in the region.

Alongside the condemnation of annexation efforts, the OIC called for full implementation of the current ceasefire framework in Gaza, a complete Israeli withdrawal, and unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid. The statement referenced ongoing international efforts to secure a comprehensive and permanent end to hostilities, noting the urgent need to address the humanitarian catastrophe that has unfolded over more than two years of conflict.

Saudi Arabia, host of the emergency session, reinforced its position through Deputy Foreign Minister Waleed al-Khereiji, who reiterated the Kingdom's rejection of Israeli initiatives in the West Bank. He warned that measures aimed at establishing sovereignty over Palestinian land sabotage prospects for peace and destabilize the broader region.

Israel's Security Cabinet recently adopted a series of decisions altering the administrative and legal landscape in the West Bank. These include removing barriers to land purchases by settlers, expanding state authority to seize areas previously under Palestinian administration, and restructuring local governance in Hebron to establish an Israel-affiliated parallel municipality. Additionally, the Israeli government approved a unilateral land registration process in the occupied territory—a move widely viewed as formalizing the confiscation of Palestinian property under international law.

Under longstanding international legal frameworks, the West Bank, occupied since 1967, is recognized as territory intended for a future Palestinian state. Israel's status as an occupying power prohibits the transfer of its civilian population into occupied areas and forbids alterations to property ownership structures. The OIC statement underscored that recent Israeli policies contravene these core principles.

The emergency gathering concluded with a call for coordinated diplomatic action to halt further escalation and to reinvigorate efforts toward a just and lasting resolution based on international law and mutually agreed parameters. As tensions remain high, the international community faces mounting pressure to translate condemnation into concrete measures that uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of all civilians in the region.

China among 80 nations and NGOs to Condemn Israel's West Bank Expansion as Assault on Palestinian Self-Determination

China among 80 nations and NGOs to Condemn Israel's West Bank Expansion as Assault on Palestinian Self-Determination

    Tuesday, February 17, 2026   No comments

In a significant display of diplomatic unity, a coalition of 80 countries and international organizations has issued a scathing condemnation of Israel's recent unilateral moves to expand its control over the occupied West Bank. The statement, delivered at a press conference in New York by Palestinian Permanent Representative Riyad Mansour, frames the Israeli actions not merely as policy shifts, but as a flagrant violation of international law that systematically denies the Palestinian people their fundamental right to self-determination.

The diverse coalition, which includes China, European nations, and Arab and Islamic states, declared its "categorical opposition to any form of annexation." The joint statement underscores a growing global consensus that Israel's entrenchment in the territories occupied since 1967 is not only illegal but poses an existential threat to the possibility of a just and lasting peace.

At the heart of the condemnation is the recognition that Israel's expansionist policies constitute a form of systemic oppression. By altering the demographic composition and legal status of the land, Israel is actively dismantling the geographic contiguity required for a viable Palestinian state. The statement explicitly rejected all measures aimed at changing the character of the occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, labeling them as actions that "undermine ongoing efforts to achieve peace and stability."

The injustice lies in the asymmetry of power and the erosion of Palestinian agency. For decades, the international community has recognized the right of the Palestinian people to determine their own political future. However, the relentless growth of settlements and the imposition of Israeli civil law over Palestinian areas effectively preempt this right, imposing a reality of permanent subjugation rather than temporary occupation.

The diplomatic rebuke was triggered by a set of decisions approved by the Israeli government on February 8. These measures aim to fundamentally alter the legal and civil reality in the West Bank by expanding Israeli enforcement authority into areas nominally under the control of the Palestinian Authority.

Under the guise of addressing "unlicensed building," water usage, and environmental concerns, Israel is extending its bureaucratic and military grip over Palestinian daily life. Critics argue this is a mechanism of de facto annexation, bypassing negotiations and imposing Israeli sovereignty by force. The 80-nation coalition warned that such steps contradict Israel's obligations under international law and demanded their immediate reversal.

While diplomatic statements outline the legal breaches, the human cost on the ground paints a grim picture of the oppression faced by Palestinians. Since the escalation of the war on Gaza began on October 8, 2023, violence in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has intensified dramatically.

According to data cited in the report, the surge in military and settler violence has resulted in the martyrdom of more than 1,115 Palestinians in the West Bank alone. Approximately 11,500 others have been injured, and a staggering 22,000 have been detained. These figures highlight a strategy of collective punishment and fear, where civilians face the constant threat of displacement, arrest, or death.

Palestinians view these actions as a coordinated effort to "impose new facts on the ground," rendering the prospect of a future state increasingly impossible. The expansion of settlements, such as Kiryat Arba near Hebron, continues to carve up the land, isolating Palestinian communities and strangling their economic and social development.

The coalition's statement drew significant weight from the Advisory Opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on July 19, 2024. The group reaffirmed its commitment to the "New York Declaration," pledging to take concrete measures in accordance with international law to help realize the Palestinian right to self-determination.

"This is not just about borders; it is about dignity and freedom," the statement implied. By emphasizing the illegality of settlements and the threat of forced displacement, the nations highlighted that the denial of self-determination is the root cause of the conflict. The statement stressed that a just and permanent peace can only be achieved by ending the occupation that began in 1967.

Despite the deepening crisis, the coalition reiterated that the two-state solution remains the only viable path to security and stability for both peoples. The vision outlined is clear: two democratic states, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security within recognized borders based on the 1967 lines, including East Jerusalem.

However, the statement served as a stark warning. Continued settlement expansion and unilateral annexation threaten to kill the two-state solution entirely. The 80 nations called for adherence to UN resolutions, the Madrid Terms of Reference, and the Arab Peace Initiative, urging the international community to move beyond rhetoric and enforce accountability.

As the diplomatic pressure mounts, the message from the global community is unequivocal: the oppression of the Palestinian people and the denial of their sovereignty are not sustainable. Without an immediate halt to illegal expansion and a genuine commitment to ending the occupation, the cycle of violence and injustice will continue to destabilize the region and betray the principles of international law.

Hasty Peace Summit in Egypt

Hasty Peace Summit in Egypt

    Monday, October 13, 2025   No comments

Diplomatic Showmanship, War Crimes, and the Unresolved Reckoning

In a hastily convened summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, world leaders gathered under the banner of peace, hoping to forge a ceasefire agreement that might end the devastating war in Gaza. But beneath the polished veneer of diplomacy, the gathering exposed deep fractures within the international order, and the growing demand for accountability—both legal and political—for the war crimes committed over the past year.

This unexpected summit, held amid growing international outrage over the Gaza conflict, saw major power players—including Turkey, Iraq, Egypt, and the United States—jockey for position, not just to broker a truce, but to shape the post-war reality in the region. Yet, one of the most dramatic developments occurred before the summit even began: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was barred from attending, following coordinated diplomatic pressure from Turkey and Iraq.

Netanyahu Blocked Amid Diplomatic Pushback

According to multiple diplomatic sources cited by Agence France-Presse, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan led efforts to block Netanyahu’s attendance, supported by Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' Al-Sudani. Erdoğan's plane reportedly circled over the Red Sea awaiting confirmation that Netanyahu would not be present, underscoring the intensity of regional resistance to legitimizing the Israeli leader’s role in any peace process.

The Iraqi delegation went as far as threatening to boycott the summit entirely if Netanyahu were allowed to attend. Cairo, under pressure, ultimately rescinded the invitation. Netanyahu later claimed that his absence was due to Jewish holidays—a statement seen widely as a face-saving maneuver.

This moment marks a significant political humiliation for Netanyahu, who had previously been confirmed by the Egyptian presidency to attend alongside Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. It also signals a shift in the diplomatic atmosphere: leaders once willing to engage Netanyahu now fear the political consequences of being seen as complicit in normalizing his actions during the Gaza campaign.

A Peace Built on Diplomatic Expediency

The Sharm El-Sheikh summit, rushed and reactive, symbolizes a broader crisis in international diplomacy. While it aims to cement a ceasefire, the terms remain vague, the enforcement mechanisms uncertain, and the actors around the table deeply divided on what post-war Gaza should look like.

Earlier this year, reports emerged that the U.S. had floated a controversial plan to install former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as head of an interim administration in Gaza. The plan, which included a multinational force to secure borders and facilitate reconstruction, was met with skepticism. Most recently, President Donald Trump expressed doubts about Blair’s appointment, questioning whether the former prime minister is “acceptable to everyone”—a subtle acknowledgment of Blair's legacy in the region and the broader crisis of legitimacy facing Western interventions.

The Shadow of War Crimes and Political Reckoning

Beneath the surface of diplomatic maneuvering lies the unresolved question of war crimes. The Gaza war, which has resulted in staggering civilian casualties and widespread destruction, has pushed far beyond the bounds of international law. Human rights organizations, UN experts, and even some Western legislators have begun calling for independent investigations into potential war crimes committed by all parties, but particularly by the Israeli military under Netanyahu’s leadership.

While legal accountability through institutions like the International Criminal Court remains politically fraught and unlikely in the short term, political accountability may arrive sooner. Netanyahu’s increasing isolation—evident in his exclusion from this summit—suggests that even long-standing allies are recalibrating their alliances. The symbolism of excluding a wartime leader from a peace summit is powerful: it sends a message that diplomatic immunity is not a given for those accused of gross violations of humanitarian norms.

Looking Ahead: Fragile Peace, Uncertain Justice

The summit in Egypt may temporarily halt the violence, but it does little to address the root causes of the conflict or to lay the groundwork for sustainable peace. With Netanyahu sidelined, the question becomes: who will shape Gaza’s future, and how will justice be served?

If anything, these developments show that multiple centers of power—regional and global—are now moving to reassert control over a crisis that spiraled far beyond its original boundaries. The speed and secrecy with which this summit was arranged are telling: peace is being pursued not through transparent negotiation, but through diplomatic backchannels shaped by geopolitical interests rather than legal principles or the voices of those most affected. 

Still, for those calling for justice and accountability, this moment may be a turning point. Netanyahu’s diplomatic snub could be the beginning of a broader reckoning—not just for him, but for all leaders who believe that military force can be deployed without consequence. The world may be witnessing the birth of a fragile peace—but it is a peace haunted by the specter of unresolved war crimes and the lingering demand for justice.

The West’s Lack of Seriousness About the Two-State Solution

The West’s Lack of Seriousness About the Two-State Solution

    Tuesday, July 29, 2025   No comments

For over three decades, the international community has paid lip service to the idea of a two-state solution as the path to peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Yet, since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993—which were supposed to pave the way for Palestinian statehood—the West, particularly the United States and its allies, has failed to take meaningful steps toward realizing this goal. Instead, Israel has continued expanding settlements in the occupied territories, undermining any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. The recent announcements by France and the UK to recognize Palestine—met with immediate condemnation by Israel and the U.S.—only highlight how political, rather than principled, the West’s stance has been. If the international community had enforced the Oslo framework and recognized Palestine years ago, the cycle of violence, including the October 7 attack and the current war in Gaza, might have been avoided.

Three Decades of Empty Promises

The Oslo Accords were meant to be the foundation for Palestinian self-governance, with a five-year interim period leading to final-status negotiations on borders, Jerusalem, refugees, and security. Yet, thirty years later, Israel has not withdrawn from the occupied territories, and illegal settlements have only expanded. The West, while rhetorically supporting a two-state solution, has done little to pressure Israel into compliance. Instead, the U.S. and European powers have shielded Israel from accountability, vetoing or blocking UN resolutions condemning settlement expansions and military actions in Palestinian territories.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened Israel’s far-right government, which has openly rejected Palestinian statehood. Just yesterday, Israel announced plans to fully reoccupy Gaza and accelerate annexation in the West Bank—actions that directly contradict the two-state solution. If the West were serious about peace, it would have taken concrete measures long ago, such as recognizing Palestine, halting military aid to Israel until it complies with international law, or imposing sanctions for settlement expansions. Instead, the U.S. and its allies have allowed Israel to dictate terms, ensuring that Palestinian statehood remains out of reach.

Missed Opportunities, Manufactured Conflicts

Israel has had countless opportunities to accept a Palestinian state, which would have provided it with a clearer moral and legal high ground. Once Palestine was recognized, any future attacks from Palestinian territories would be seen as aggression from one state against another, legitimizing Israel’s right to self-defense under international law. Yet Israel has consistently chosen expansionism over coexistence. Just this week, the Israeli government has signaled plans not only to reoccupy Gaza fully but also to assert control over the West Bank—making clear that the goal is not peace, but dominance.

The Abraham Accords, which normalized ties between Israel and certain Arab states, were framed as a diplomatic success. But in reality, they were a workaround—a means to ignore the core issue of Palestinian statehood. Without addressing the root cause, no agreement can bring lasting peace. Recognition of Palestine, not its erasure, is the only path to stability.

If the West genuinely seeks peace in the Middle East, it must move beyond rhetoric. Recognition of the Palestinian state must happen now, and it must be followed by concrete measures to ensure that state’s sovereignty. That includes sanctions against Israel should it unilaterally attack or reoccupy Palestinian territory without provocation. Anything less enables the status quo of violence, displacement, and injustice.

The continued delay in recognition only emboldens the Israeli government to seize more land and entrench a system of apartheid. Western inaction is not neutrality—it is complicity. A principled stance would align with the international consensus and uphold the same values of self-determination and human rights that the West claims to champion.

Global Recognition vs. Western Obstruction

More than 140 out of 193 UN member states already recognize Palestine as a sovereign state. The fact that most of the holdouts are Western nations—primarily the U.S., Canada, Australia, and parts of Europe—demonstrates that their position is driven by geopolitical allegiance to Israel rather than a genuine commitment to peace. When France recently announced its intention to recognize Palestine, only the U.S. and Israel objected. Similarly, when the UK indicated it would recognize Palestine in September, Israel immediately lashed out. These reactions prove that Israel’s government has no intention of allowing Palestinian statehood, and the West’s reluctance to act independently only enables this obstruction.

Had Palestine been recognized as a state under the Oslo framework at any point in the past 30 years, the current crisis could have been averted. A sovereign Palestine would have had diplomatic and legal means to address grievances, reducing the need for armed resistance. There would have been no need for the Abraham Accords—which bypassed Palestinian rights in favor of Arab-Israeli normalization—and no Houthi attacks in the Red Sea in solidarity with Gaza. The West’s failure to act has perpetuated the conflict, not resolved it.

The Path to Peace: Recognition and Accountability

If the West truly wants peace, it must take immediate action:

• Recognize Palestine – The UK and France’s steps are positive, but all Western nations must follow. Recognition would force Israel to negotiate in good faith rather than indefinitely delaying statehood.
• Impose Consequences on Israel – If Israel continues annexation or attacks Palestinian territories without provocation, the West must impose sanctions, halt arms sales, and support ICC investigations.
• Enforce International Law – The U.S. must stop vetoing UN Security Council resolutions that hold Israel accountable for violations.

The longer the West delays, the more land Israel takes, and the more violence escalates. The two-state solution is not dead because Palestinians or the international community abandoned it—it is dying because Israel and its Western backers have systematically undermined it. If the West does not act now, the alternative is endless war. The choice is clear: recognize Palestine or bear responsibility for the bloodshed that follows.

If the West fails to act now, the two-state solution will soon become obsolete, leaving only two grim alternatives: perpetual apartheid or a catastrophic, single-state conflict. Israel’s relentless settlement expansion, its stated intent to annex the West Bank, and its ongoing destruction of Gaza demonstrate that it has no interest in allowing Palestinian sovereignty. Meanwhile, the West’s inaction—masked by empty diplomatic statements—has only emboldened Israel’s extremist government to accelerate its colonization of Palestinian land. The consequences of this failure are already unfolding: the October 7 attack, the brutal war on Gaza, and the rising tensions across the region prove that oppression breeds resistance, and resistance begets further violence. Without urgent Western intervention to enforce a political solution, the cycle will only grow bloodier. The next uprising will be more violent, the next Israeli retaliation more devastating, and the next generation more radicalized. The window for a two-state solution is closing rapidly; if the West continues to prioritize Israeli impunity over justice and peace, it will bear responsibility for the explosion of violence that follows.

Israeli soldiers fired at foreign diplomats visiting west bank, Palestine

Israeli soldiers fired at foreign diplomats visiting west bank, Palestine

    Wednesday, May 21, 2025   No comments

Approximately one hour ago, Israeli soldiers fired at foreign diplomats from European and Arab states who were touring Jenin in the West Bank, Palestine.

The IDF has released an official statement on the incident, claiming that the delegation 'deviated from the approved route,' leading soldiers to fire 'warning shots.' 

The delegation reportedly included 35 ambassadors, consuls, and diplomats from the European Union, the United Kingdom, Egypt, Jordan, China, Russia, Japan, and others.

Italy has summoned the Israeli ambassador due to the event, and soon after, France has also summoned the Israeli ambassador for an explanation.

EU foreign policy chief states, 'Any threats to the lives of diplomats are unacceptable,' in response to the attack on diplomats by Israel in Jenin.

EU foreign policy chief states, 'Any threats to the lives of diplomats are unacceptable,' in response to the attack on diplomats by Israel in Jenin.

 

 

France will recognize Palestine Soon

France will recognize Palestine Soon

    Friday, April 11, 2025   No comments

The West is behind in recognizing the rights of the Palestinians to self-determination. But it is better late then never.

West's refusal to recognize Palestine as an independent state could have prevented the October attacks and the cycle of wars in Gaza. Now some Western countries, including France, are coming to accept that potential.

France's president just announced that France will recognize Palestine in months.  France’s potential recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state is quite important, despite the fact that 147 out of 193 UN member states have already done so. Here's why France’s stance carries significant weight:

1. France's Influence in the West

France is a major Western power—a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a founding member of the European Union, and part of the G7. Most of the countries that haven’t recognized Palestine are Western or aligned with the U.S. position, including the U.S., UK, Germany, and others. So, a shift in France’s stance could:

• Encourage other Western countries to reconsider their position.
• Break the perception of a unified Western front against recognition.

2. European Policy Shift

Macron's statement might signal a broader shift in EU policy, especially since he hinted this move could happen in coordination with other states or at a UN summit in June. This could:

• Build momentum for a multilateral recognition initiative.
• Put pressure on other EU members to align or clarify their positions.

3. Symbolic & Diplomatic Impact

• Recognition from a country like France is more than symbolic:
• It could increase diplomatic legitimacy for Palestine on the global stage.
• It might influence international forums, aid flows, and negotiations.
• It adds pressure on Israel by elevating the statehood issue beyond bilateral talks.

4. Tactical Timing

France possibly tying this recognition to a UN event in June also gives it diplomatic weight—it suggests recognition could become part of a broader international initiative, maybe even linked to Arab normalization with Israel.

Member of the Saudi Shura Council to Trump: The truth is clear and falsehood is confused"

Member of the Saudi Shura Council to Trump: The truth is clear and falsehood is confused"

    Sunday, February 09, 2025   No comments

Member of the Saudi Shura Council, Yousef bin Trad al-Saadoun, published an article in the Saudi newspaper, Okaz, in which he advised Trump, if he wants to be a champion of peace and achieve stability and prosperity for the Middle East, "to move his beloved Israelis to Alaska and then to Greenland after annexing it."

al-Saadoun added: "The Zionists and their supporters must realize well that they will not be able to lure the Saudi leadership and government into the traps of media maneuvers and false political pressures."

He also claimed that the "official foreign policy of the United States will seek the illegal occupation of sovereign land and the ethnic cleansing of its inhabitants, which are the Israeli approach and are considered crimes against humanity. Anyone who follows the path of the emergence and continuation of Israel clearly realizes that this plan was certainly formulated and approved by the Zionist entity, and was handed over to their ally to read from the White House podium."

al-Saadoun's article is just one reaction of many to Trump's statement and to Israeli leaders' suggestion that Saudi Arabia should be home to Palestinians.

On Thursday, Benjamin Netanyahu said during an interview with Israel's Channel 14: "The Saudis can create a Palestinian state in Saudi Arabia; they have a lot of land over there."

 These statements seem to unite Arab regimes against any plans for the forced removal of Palestinians from their land.

Palestinian and Egyptian officials have condemned Netanyahu’s suggestion to establish a Palestinian state in Saudi Arabia, calling it an attack on the Kingdom’s sovereignty.

The Palestinian Foreign Ministry denounced the proposal as “racist and anti-peace,” labelling it a blatant violation of Saudi Arabia’s sovereignty and stability. Hussein Al-Sheikh, secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said Netanyahu’s remarks disregarded international law and conventions, stressing, “The State of Palestine will only be on the land of Palestine.”

Egypt also slammed the comments as “irresponsible and unacceptable,” with its Foreign Ministry stating that Netanyahu’s remarks infringe on Saudi sovereignty and violate both international law and the UN Charter.

Saudi Arabia praises Arab governments for their support

The Saudi Foreign Ministry praised, on Sunday, the positions of Arab and Islamic countries in condemnation, disapproval and complete rejection of what the Prime Minister of the Israeli occupation government, Benjamin Netanyahu, stated regarding the displacement of the Palestinian people from their land.

In a statement, it considered that "these positions confirm the centrality of the Palestinian cause to Arab and Islamic countries," stressing its categorical rejection of Netanyahu's statements that "aimed at diverting attention from the successive crimes committed by the Israeli occupation against the Palestinian brothers in Gaza, including what they are exposed to in terms of ethnic cleansing."

It pointed out that this "extremist occupying mentality does not understand what the Palestinian land means to the brotherly Palestinian people and their emotional, historical and legal connection to this land, and does not consider that the Palestinian people deserve life in the first place."

The Foreign Ministry statement also stressed that "the brotherly Palestinian people have a right to their land, and are not intruders or immigrants who can be expelled whenever the brutal Israeli occupation wants."

It pointed out that these ideas are what prevent "peace," through "rejecting peaceful coexistence and rejecting peace initiatives, and practicing systematic injustice against the Palestinian people for more than 75 years, without caring about the right, justice, law, and values ​​​​established in the United Nations Charter, including the right of man to live in dignity on his land."

The Saudi Foreign Ministry concluded its statement by emphasizing the right of the Palestinian people "which will remain steadfast, and no one will be able to take it away from them no matter how long it takes, and that lasting peace will not be achieved except by returning to the logic of reason, and accepting the principle of peaceful coexistence through the two-state solution."

Saudi Arabi's Statement:

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia appreciates the condemnation, disapproval and total rejection announced by the brotherly countries towards what Benjamin Netanyahu stated regarding the displacement of the Palestinian people from their land and the Kingdom values the positions that emphasize the centrality of the Palestinian issue to the Arab and Muslim countries.

"Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic; It Cannot Be Both"

"Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic; It Cannot Be Both"

    Monday, January 27, 2025   No comments

There is no enduring end to cyclical violence without a political solution to the fate of the Palestinians. No one is seriously talking about the day after another Gaza war, unless they talk about political settlement, not security arrangement. The New York Times borrowed a line from John Kerry  who argued that "Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic. It Cannot Be Both." The NYT article  interpreted that statement by invoking another maxim: "States Don’t Have a Right to Exist. People Do." Here are some excerpts from the article, referenced by similar views published in global media outlets.

  

The power of words: terrorism, antisemitism, and other qualifiers of killings

The power of words: terrorism, antisemitism, and other qualifiers of killings

    Tuesday, November 26, 2024   No comments

Media coverage and political reaction to the killing of an Israeli emissary of a branch of the Jewish community, Chabad, an affiliate of the "Haredim", in UAE reveal the power of words to determine the emotional, ethical, and legal reaction to an act of violence.

Media outlets struggled to get the headline and summary "right" and politicians rushed to frame with killing as an "act of terrorism" or as act of "antisemitism".

The New York Times's initial coverage framed Kogan's death as a crime where an "Israeli rabbi who disappeared in Dubai is found dead." Reacting to comments by readers who noticed the passive voice and the neutrality embedded in the words "disappeared", the newspaper, which has been struggling to "recalibrate" its editorial policy for coverage the deadly war in Gaza, edited its original heading to say: "An Israeli Rabbi Is Abducted and Killed in the U.A.E."

The Israeli government official reaction indicated that it views “the killing as an act of terrorism,” without accusing any organization or state, though it often accuses “Iran and its allies of seeking to target Israelis abroad.”

Netanyahu characterized Kogan’s killing “a despicable antisemitic terrorist attack.”

The killing took place at a time when Israeli armed forces are involved in wars in Gaza and Lebonon, which killed tens of thousands thus far, and brining protest against Israel in all over the world.

The government of UAE, which normalized its relations with Israel few years ago, is being methodical in solving the murder. Political killings or assassinations involving Isael and Palestinians are not new to UAE.

In 2010, official in Dubai, one of the emirates making the singularity called United Arab Emirates, accused Israel of assassinating a Palestinianmember of Hamas. After weeks of investigation and looking through hundreds of hours of surveillance video, Dubai Police investigators declared that they knew exactly how senior Hamas official, Mahmoud al Mabhouh, was killed in his Dubai hotel room And by whom. Dubai Police said that they were “certain Israel's spy agency Mossad was behind the killing of Mabhouh on January 20^th, 2010”. Although the Israeli government did not official take credit for the killing, which created a diplomatic crisis at the time because Mossad agents used third country diplomatic documents to get into Dubai, individual members of the Israeli government indirectly admitted to assassination.

Then Israeli cabinet minister Benjamin Ben Eliezer appeared to issue a threat against other Hamas leaders while talking on Israel Radio. "None of their people are untouchable, they can all be reached," he said. A former deputy director of Mossad, Ilan Mizrahi, told the Times of London after the killing that "Mossad has been restored to its glory days."

Dubai police ended up naming 26 suspects in the plot to kill Mabhouh. They have published photocopies of the false passports they were travelling on and security camera video of the suspects tracking their victim in his hotel.

Media Review: Malaysia will not recognize the occupation entity under any circumstances

Media Review: Malaysia will not recognize the occupation entity under any circumstances

    Monday, November 18, 2024   No comments

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim affirmed his country's full commitment to supporting the Palestinian cause and the Palestinian people in various international forums, stressing that Malaysia will not recognize the occupation entity under any circumstances.

Ibrahim indicated - in an interview with Aljazeera Mubasher - that he was subjected to great pressure due to his declared positions against Israel, but he stressed that his country will continue this approach without change.

In the context of his speech, the Malaysian Prime Minister likened the path of the former heads of the Hamas Political Bureau, Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar, to the path of the late South African leader Nelson Mandela, who struggled to liberate his country from the apartheid regime.

Ibrahim called for the necessity of expelling Israel from the United Nations, noting that Malaysia is currently working on a draft resolution to submit to the United Nations General Assembly in light of the continued Israeli crimes against the Palestinians, including targeting civilians and hospitals. Malaysia has also submitted a request to the International Court of Justice to hold Israel accountable for its crimes in the Gaza Strip, stressing that it will continue its legal and diplomatic efforts in all regional and international forums.

Ibrahim said, "We have not left any international or regional forum without raising our voices loudly in it to support the rights of the Palestinian people and establish their independent state and work to end their tragedy."

Malaysia's Position

At the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Peru, Ibrahim expressed his country's support for Palestine to US President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, but noted that they "did not listen."

The prime minister accused these countries of colluding with Israel by remaining silent on the ongoing crimes in the Gaza Strip and the occupied territories since October 7, 2023. He wrote on the "X" platform that the West "continues to turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed by Israel, which makes it a de facto partner in these crimes against humanity."

Ibrahim stressed that his country continues to send humanitarian aid to Gaza, including treating wounded women and children in Malaysian hospitals. He also praised the role played by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in providing humanitarian relief, noting that Malaysia will continue to support its activities in the sector.

At the end of his speech, the Malaysian prime minister sent a message of solidarity to the Palestinian and Lebanese people, calling on them to stand firm in the face of challenges. "Stand firm, we are with you, we support you and we pray for your victory," he said.

In December 2023, Malaysia announced a ban on ships flying the Israeli flag and preventing ships heading to Israel from loading goods at its ports. The government explained that these measures come in response to Israel's continued violations of international law and humanitarian principles.

This position comes after a similar one was declared by Saudi Arabia, which stated that "normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel is not on the table until the "two-state solution" is achieved and a Palestinian state is established.

Israeli Minister responds to Saudi Arabia's push for two-state solution: There will be no Palestine

Israeli Minister responds to Saudi Arabia's push for two-state solution: There will be no Palestine

    Monday, November 11, 2024   No comments

As if to respond to Saudi-Sponsored Summit of supporters of the two-state solition, Israeli minister Smotrich says: I have issued instructions to prepare for extending sovereignty over the West Bank. 

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said he had given instructions to prepare for the extension of Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, explaining that he hopes to implement this plan next year.

Aljazeera reported that Reuters quoted Smotrich, who belongs to the far-right Israeli party, as saying that the time had come in the new era of US President Donald Trump to impose Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank, and he expressed his hope that Trump would support this move.

The finance minister, an ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, added that 2025 will be the year of sovereignty over the West Bank.

Smotrich has extremist positions on the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, which has prompted European calls for sanctions against him and Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, in addition to repeated criticism from Washington, Tel Aviv’s ally.

Saudi Arabia seeking political cover from Muslim states before pushing for the implementation of the two state solution

The extraordinary Arab-Islamic summit kicked off today, Monday, in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, with the attendance of heads of state and leaders.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman stressed in his speech that this summit is "an extension of the previous summit, which discussed the aggression on Gaza and Lebanon," stressing his country's rejection of the Israeli aggression on Iranian territory.

Bin Salman condemned "the military operations targeting Lebanese territory," expressing his rejection of the violation of its sovereignty, and renewing his rejection of the genocide committed by the Israeli occupation in the Gaza Strip.

While the Saudi Crown Prince said that the Kingdom "denounces the aggression and supports the Palestinian people obtaining their full rights," he condemned the occupation's prevention of the UNRWA from providing its services in the occupied Palestinian territories, and its obstruction of the work of humanitarian organizations.

  

KSA FM: Normalization with KSA is off the table... What is happening in northern Gaza ... can only be described as a form of genocide

KSA FM: Normalization with KSA is off the table... What is happening in northern Gaza ... can only be described as a form of genocide

    Thursday, October 31, 2024   No comments

Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan said on Thursday that normalization between Saudi Arabia and "Israel" is not on the table until the "two-state solution" is achieved and a Palestinian state is established.

He stressed, during a dialogue session within the activities of the "Future Investment Initiative" in Riyadh, that "the issue of normalization is not the only one at stake now, but the situation in the entire region as well, if we do not find a solution and a clear path to establish a Palestinian state."

Bin Farhan hoped "that the Israeli leadership will see that this is the right and just thing to do, and it also serves Israel's security and strategic interests."

The Saudi Foreign Minister said that establishing a Palestinian state is linked to the principles of international law, not to recognition by "Israel."

He pointed out that the ceasefire negotiations in Gaza have repeatedly collapsed due to new demands from "Israel". He said that "the Israeli occupation is committing genocide in Gaza".

He added: "We are working to ensure that the Palestinians obtain their legitimate rights, and that Palestine is a member of the international community".

In a related context, he stressed that the Kingdom supports international efforts to stop the escalation in Lebanon.

He believed that Saudi-Iranian relations are moving in the right direction, but are complicated by regional conditions.

He touched on "Vision 2030", noting that Saudi Arabia aims through it to stabilize neighboring countries.

The National is publishing a full chronology of Israel's war on Gaza

The National is publishing a full chronology of Israel's war on Gaza

    Friday, October 11, 2024   No comments

Message from the editor of The National: Tomorrow's front page explained

It is a year since Israel began the deadliest attack on Palestine in modern history.

According to Oxfam, more women and children have been killed by the Israeli military in Gaza this past year than in the equivalent period of any other conflict in the last two decades.

I could go on and on, provide statistic after statistic from respected charities and NGOs. But none of it could ever fully capture the reality of the situation in Gaza.

One of our political reporters attended a devastating press conference this week, hosted by the Palestinian ambassador, hearing from two women who had lost dozens of family members who described the horrors facing their people every day.

There were three journalists from English-language outlets there. Just three.

We are a very small team compared to some of the legacy titles in the UK, and we could find the time to send a reporter to this important event. Why couldn't our other media colleagues?

You could fill every newspaper in the country from cover to cover, reporting news on the horrors occurring in Gaza. But many papers can't even fill a news brief.

So we decided to work with dedicated campaigners, and fill our front page, and a huge chunk of our newspaper, with a detailed chronology of exactly what Israel has done to Gaza.

Tomorrow's front page of The National aims to highlight the scale of the atrocities taking place in Palestine, and shows that the media have a responsibility to use their platforms to share the reality of the situation with the world.

We publish a timeline of a year of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. It’s all here in black and white—the war crimes, murdered journalists, flattened hospitals, orphaned children. 7567 words, 42,000 deaths. Don’t look away.’ - Laura Webster, Editor.

                            Message from the editor of The National (https://www.thenational.scot/)

Media review: What does CBS's handling of Ta-Nehisi Coates' interview tell us about US media when it comes to telling the story of Palestininas?

Media review: What does CBS's handling of Ta-Nehisi Coates' interview tell us about US media when it comes to telling the story of Palestininas?

    Wednesday, October 09, 2024   No comments

News stories about Palestine cannot be covered by news media like any other news subject. That is the main point of the recent controversy surrounding CBS's interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates.

Coates response to the challenge tells the full story: Dokoupil accusing Coates of leaving some information out is not the real issue. The real issue is that Western media outlets have already set the standard for the plight of Palestinians: They should not be given any space, not an equal space, not enough space... they should be given any space at all. And that is the main point in Coates' response. 

The story of Palestinians is not told enough, and when it is, those attempting to tell it, are accused of "supporting terrorism" and of being anti-Semitic. Even Semitic persons--Jews who survived (or who are children of survivors of) the European crime against humanity inflicted on Jews, who object to a genocide committed in their name or the name of their religion or their identity, are attacked as sympathizers with terrorists.

So Dokoupil was not interested in pushing back against unbalanced "reporting", he pushed back because Coates was telling a story that no one is willing to tell for the reasons that were playing out before him live and where he was living the true experience of doing so. There is no record of Mr. Dokoupil pushing back against those who come to tell the Israeli point of view, telling them that they left out the story of Palestinians being subjected to apartheid system, the stories of Palestinians' rights to self-determination being denied by Israel for more than 75 years...

“Why leave out that Israel is surrounded by countries that want to eliminate it?” Dokoupil asked. “Why leave out that Israel deals with terror groups that want to eliminate it?”

“There is no shortage of that perspective in American media,” Coates replied. “I am most concerned, always, with those who don’t have a voice.”

This exchange says it all.