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 Cairo, under pressure, ultimately rescinded the invitation.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.