Media review: Israeli Airstrike on Qatar Shakes Gulf States' Confidence in US Protection, Report Says

Media review: Israeli Airstrike on Qatar Shakes Gulf States' Confidence in US Protection, Report Says

    Friday, September 12, 2025   No comments

A recent Israeli military strike on Qatar’s capital has triggered a significant crisis of confidence among Gulf Arab states, casting serious doubt on the reliability of American security guarantees, according to a report by The Washington Post.

The attack, which targeted Doha, has reportedly fueled deep-seated anger and a sense of insecurity across the Persian Gulf. Analysts suggest that Israel’s apparent ease in carrying out the strike led many regional powers to a stark conclusion: if a U.S. partner like Qatar can be attacked, then no neighboring American ally is truly safe.

At the core of the growing disillusionment is the perception that the United States was either unable or unwilling to restrain its close ally, Israel, even when its actions directly threatened another American partner. This has fundamentally shaken the long-standing pillar of Gulf security, which has heavily relied on U.S. military and diplomatic backing for decades.

One researcher from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) noted that the uniquely close relationship between Washington and Jerusalem made this strike "qualitatively different" from previous conflicts. Rather than acting as a deterrent, the U.S. response was perceived as weak, often limited to "pro-forma expressions of dissatisfaction" without imposing any concrete, deterrent measures to stop what is seen as "Israel’s unrestricted military aggression in the region."

The strike has "reinforced the feeling that Washington is an unreliable security partner," the analyst stated.

This incident is not an isolated event but the latest in a years-long erosion of trust. The Post highlights that Gulf confidence in American protection has been declining through both Democratic and Republican administrations. This trend is driven by a perceived U.S. "strategic pivot" towards Asia and the diminished strategic importance of Middle Eastern oil to Washington.

Furthermore, the attack on Doha has undermined a previously held belief among some Gulf leaders that a close personal relationship with a U.S. president could directly influence policy. Hopes that such a bond with former President Donald Trump would shape American actions were decisively dashed by the bombing of Qatar.

The event signals a potential strategic inflection point, forcing Gulf nations to seriously reconsider the foundation of their security architecture and question the dependability of a partnership that has been a cornerstone of regional stability for over half a century.

Media Review: Nationalism, Distrust, and the Specter of Regime Change

Media Review: Nationalism, Distrust, and the Specter of Regime Change

    Wednesday, August 13, 2025   No comments

 

1. Netanyahu’s Overt Call: “Iran for Iranians”

On August 12, 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a striking video address aimed directly at the Iranian people. He urged them to “take to the streets”, “demand justice”, and resist “ruling fanatics” in Tehran. Leveraging Iran’s current water crisis—one described as the worst drought in a century—he promised that “Israel’s top water experts will flood into every Iranian city,” offering cutting-edge recycling and desalination technologies once “your country is free.” Netanyahu framed this not merely as political pressure but as a humanitarian overture, rhetorically intertwining water scarcity with political liberation.
His language tugged at historical symbols—the “descendants of Cyrus the Great”—and invoked Zionist forebears: “as our founding father, Theodor Herzl, said... ‘if you will it, a free Iran is not a dream.’” Critics across the region condemned the message as a blatant interference in Iran’s sovereignty and a call for regime change.

2. Expansionist Imagery and the “Greater Israel” Vision

Simultaneously, in an i24 News interview, Netanyahu responded affirmatively when asked if he felt a connection to the concept of “Greater Israel”—a historical extremist vision stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, enveloping Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. He stated flatly: "Very much." (Note: the Arabic-language Al Jazeera coverage confirmed condemnation by Jordan’s foreign ministry of these remarks, calling them “dangerous provocative escalation” and a violation of sovereignty and international law).  Jordan officially denounced these statements as “absurd illusions” that undermine Arab states and Palestinian rights, and called for international accountability.

3. Mutually Reinforcing Nationalist Narratives

These developments crystallize a deeper pattern of mutual antagonism: just as many in the Arab and Muslim worlds chant “Death to Israel” (often interpreted as opposition to the Zionist regime, not genocide), Israeli leaders—including Netanyahu—express parallel desires for overthrowing nationalist or Islamist regimes, from Iraq and Syria to Iran and potentially Turkey. Israel’s historical role in the fall of Arab nationalist regimes—the Ba’athists in Iraq and Syria, Nasserism in Egypt, Gaddafi in Libya—sets precedent for its current posture toward Iran, adding layers of distrust and ideological competition.

4. Media Narratives vs. Unspoken Realities

Mainstream coverage often frames Israel’s messaging as defensive—justified by existential threats or humanitarian concern. Yet the explicit linkage between Israel’s offer of technology and regime change reveals a more assertive posture: Israel positioning itself not only as a regional power but as a potential kingmaker.

This dynamic echoes past episodes: British and U.S. support for regime change in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan, often under the banner of liberation, but frequently yielding destabilization. Indeed, analysts warn that regime elimination without a constructive transition plan can exacerbate chaos and strengthen hardliners—concerns now surging around Iran.

5. Broader Implications: Ethno-Religious Nationalism and Regional Instability

The mutual calls for regime change are not isolated acts of political posturing — they are rooted in competing nationalist visions that draw their legitimacy from deeply embedded historical, ethnic, and religious narratives. This clash produces a dangerous self-reinforcing cycle that shapes nearly every major crisis in the Middle East.

Israel’s vision:

Israeli statecraft, particularly under Netanyahu, increasingly draws on biblical and historicist narratives to justify a posture of permanent expansion and dominance. This is not merely about securing existing borders; it’s about positioning Israel as the central civilizational power in the region. The appeal to “Greater Israel” ties modern foreign policy directly to ancient territorial claims, allowing nationalist leaders to frame strategic moves as fulfilling a sacred mission rather than a negotiable political agenda. In this worldview, offering water technology to Iranians is not only a humanitarian gesture but also a demonstration of how Israel imagines itself — as a benevolent hegemon to “liberated” peoples, once they accept the dismantling of regimes seen as hostile.

Resistance’s response:

Arab nationalist and Islamist movements see this Israeli narrative as an existential threat — not only to Palestinian sovereignty but to the very idea of Arab or Islamic self-determination. From their perspective, the vision of “Greater Israel” confirms suspicions that Israel’s security discourse masks territorial ambitions stretching across multiple states. This perception reinforces a siege mentality, where even minor concessions to Israel are framed as steps toward regional capitulation. Consequently, slogans like “Death to Israel” — while often clarified by their authors as a rejection of the Zionist regime rather than the Jewish people — are received by Israelis as genocidal, deepening the emotional and political chasm.

Mutual demonization:

Each side interprets the other’s rhetoric in its most maximalist and threatening form. Israeli leaders often portray their regional adversaries as irredeemable aggressors whose regimes must be toppled for peace to be possible. Conversely, Arab and Islamist nationalists cast Israeli policy as inherently expansionist, immune to compromise, and bent on cultural erasure. This mutual framing leaves no space for recognizing reformist or moderate currents on either side. Internal dissent within Iran, for example, is subsumed under the binary of “pro-regime” or “agent of foreign powers,” while dissent within Israel against expansionism is marginalized as naïve or disloyal.

Media as a force multiplier:

Regional and global media ecosystems amplify these narratives by privileging official statements and the most provocative soundbites. Nuanced or dissenting voices rarely receive the same coverage. This selective amplification means that both publics primarily hear confirmation of their worst fears. Israeli audiences see chants and missile parades without context; Arab audiences see maps of an expanded Israel without the debates inside Israel over their feasibility or morality. In effect, media serves as a mirror that reflects back the most polarizing version of reality, hardening nationalist sentiment and making diplomatic de-escalation politically costly for any leader.

The result is a feedback loop: nationalist rhetoric begets reciprocal hostility, which then justifies the next round of escalation. Over time, this pattern entrenches zero-sum thinking, where any gain for one side is assumed to be an irreversible loss for the other.

6. What Comes Next?

With Israel openly signaling support for regime change, and invoking ideological justifications, the region edges closer to escalatory brinkmanship. If Iran responds—either through intensified repression or reprisals—the potential for conflict could spiral. Global actors—especially the U.S., Europe, Russia, and regional powers—must urgently clarify whether they support such overt regime-change diplomacy or seek de-escalation through dialogue and multilateral engagement.

The events of August 12, 2025—Netanyahu’s video appeal and the embrace of “Greater Israel”—are not isolated flashes of rhetoric but crystallize long-standing ideological and geopolitical fault lines. The language of liberation and water aid interwoven with conquest and regime overthrow exemplifies the complex, dangerous entanglement of ethno-religious nationalism, realpolitik, and regional power plays. As each side frames itself as the rightful architect of the region’s future, the real victims may be stability, human rights, and any hope for equitable governance.

Israel’s prime minister’s call for Iranians to overthrow their government mirrors Iran’s rejection of the “Zionist regime,” underscoring two points: first, the deep incompatibility between race-based or religion-based nationalism and genuinely pluralistic societies; second, the role of supremacist ideologies as a driving force behind such nationalist regimes. Zionism—with both its religious dimension (membership in the Jewish faith) and its ethnic dimension (Jewish identity as race or ethnicity)—and Arab or Persian ethnic nationalism, alongside Islamism as a religious form, are locked in a clash that cannot be resolved by one prevailing over the others, but perhaps only by the eventual failure of them all.

  

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.

 

 

Morocco principled foreign policy: If you support our occupation of Sahara you can say anything you want

Morocco principled foreign policy: If you support our occupation of Sahara you can say anything you want

    Wednesday, October 30, 2024   No comments

Rewarding Macron for supporting Morocco's continued occupation of Western Sahara, Moroccan politicians applauded him when he said "Palestinian resistance is barbaric." Moroccan lawmakers applauded French President Macron after he delivered a speech in the Moroccan Parliament in which he stated: "Israel has the right to self-defense. Palestinian resistance is barbaric."

Macron does not seeem to be able to make up his mind. Previously, he called on Israeli leaders to "stop killing Gazan women and babies". He was also reported to have told Israeli's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who described his war on on Gaza and Lebanon as a "war of civilization," Macron told him that "defending civilization is not done by sowing barbarism."

Macron, who still refuses to acknowledge the crimes France committed in Africa, including the massacring of 1.5 million Algerians, sees all resistance as Barbaric. But that is the only position that could justify war crimes at the hands of colonial occupiers.

Outside the Parliament, Moroccans took to the street to protest his statements. Morocco is a good example for where the rulers are governing with no popular support. Moroccans protesting outside claimed that "those who applaud in parliament do not represent the Moroccan people, neither closely nor remotely."

Israeli Minister says US Sanctions blow to State sovereignty

Israeli Minister says US Sanctions blow to State sovereignty

    Sunday, July 21, 2024   No comments

Historically, the US government has imposed sanctions on private citizens and government officials of other countries. Recently, with the continued attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians in West Bank the US government decided to sanction some Israelis who are responsible for the violence. Last week, US media sources reported that the administration of President Joe Biden is considering imposing sanctions on Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, due to the deterioration of the security situation in the occupied West Bank.

Reacting to the news, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has described US efforts to impose sanctions on him over settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank as a “fatal blow to Israeli sovereignty.”

“Imposing US sanctions on an elected official and a senior minister is a fatal blow to Israeli sovereignty and relations between the two countries,” said Smotrich, who heads the Religious Zionism party.

“Washington’s efforts to impose sanctions on me stem from the domestic political goals of those who claim to lead the largest democracy in the world,” he added.

Smotrich claimed that his duty was to strengthen Tel Aviv’s grip on parts of the homeland in Judea and Samaria (the biblical name for the West Bank) and prevent the establishment of a state that would endanger Israel’s existence.

Of note, this week the International Court of Justice issued a ruling that Israel's activities in West Bank and Jerusalem are illegal, must be stopped, and Palestinians harmed by these activities must be compensated.

Media review: NYT's Friedman, "Biden must push Israel to accept Hamas' demands"

Media review: NYT's Friedman, "Biden must push Israel to accept Hamas' demands"

    Tuesday, June 18, 2024   No comments

American journalist Thomas Friedman confirmed that the Israeli occupation entity is currently living in "existential danger", at a time when the axis of resistance has managed to "tighten its grip on Israel", while "the latter has no military or diplomatic response".

In an opinion piece he wrote in the American newspaper "The New York Times", Friedman warned of the danger of war with Hezbollah on "Israel", noting that the Islamic resistance in Lebanon is armed with precision missiles capable of destroying large areas of the Israeli infrastructure.

Friedman explained that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "leads Israel, while he must remain in power, in order to avoid the possibility of being sent to prison on corruption charges", at a time when the occupation faces the possibility of war breaking out on several fronts.

According to him, Netanyahu, in order to remain in power and avoid prison, "sold his soul in order to form a government with right-wing extremists, who insist that Israel must fight in Gaza until Hamas is eliminated, in order to achieve complete victory", as they claim.

Now, the Israeli "war cabinet" has collapsed, due to "Netanyahu's lack of a plan to end the war and safely withdraw from the Gaza Strip," while "extremists in his government coalition are looking forward to their next steps to reach power," according to Friedman.

While the American journalist pointed out that these extremist ministers "caused a lot of damage," he warned that "no friend (of Israel) should participate in this circus," as he described it.

In this context, Friedman stressed the need to form a new government in "Israel" and remove Netanyahu from the position of Prime Minister, through new elections.

The American journalist also expressed his support for what former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak confirmed in the American newspaper Haaretz last Thursday, which is that "Israel is facing the most serious crisis in its history."

In light of this, Friedman warned that "every American should be concerned about this matter," explaining that it represents "a recipe for dragging the United States into a war in the Middle East to help Israel."

In this context, Friedman believed that US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken "should not make another trip to the Middle East without the agreement of both Israel and Hamas on a clear plan to end the war."

While acknowledging the need for US President Joe Biden to push the occupation to submit to Hamas's conditions to stop the war, Friedman stressed that "Biden must tell Israel that it must accept Hamas's main demand: to end the war completely now, and withdraw from the Gaza Strip, in exchange for the return of all Israeli prisoners."

Friedman believed that ending the war in the Gaza Strip would "lead to reaching an agreement mediated by the US with Hezbollah, in order to calm the war on the northern border."

He added that Netanyahu's idea that some Palestinians, who do not belong to Hamas or the Palestinian Authority, will run the place for "Israel" is "a fantasy." In light of all this, the American journalist stressed that "Israel must leave Gaza," while the head of the Hamas movement in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, continues to run the Strip.

Friedman argued his point of view without even mentioning the human cost of this reckless war that civilians in Gaza have endured for more than 250 days and that may last for months more.

Reviewing Naomi Klein’s Declaration of Exodus from Zionism

Reviewing Naomi Klein’s Declaration of Exodus from Zionism

    Thursday, May 16, 2024   No comments

On the eve of the Jewish Passover, and at his “Seder” celebration in the streets of New York, which was witnessed by Jews and non-Jews, Naomi Klein, the Canadian Jewish writer and activist, professor of climate justice and director of the Center for Climate Justice at the University of British Columbia, delivered a memorable speech representing “Declaration of Exodus” for the Jews of the world from Zionism and its false idol in Palestine, in which it used two symbols from the Old Testament that have a very important significance for Jews of all times: - The Book of Exodus, one of the five books of the Torah, which tells the story of the exodus of the children of Israel, led by the Prophet Moses, from the captivity of Pharaoh. In biblical Egypt, the Exodus is the moment of liberation from captivity.

- And the story of the golden calf that the Samaritan made and which the Children of Israel took as a god in the absence of Moses, when he preceded them to the appointed time of his Lord, but the Samaritan led them astray, and they broke their appointment with Moses. It is a moment of tremendous setback for the Children of Israel’s journey with God, the prophets, and prophecy.

Klein recalled the moment of Moses descending from the mountain and his extreme anger when he found the children of Israel worshiping a “golden calf,” calling for the rejection of the worship of the new “golden calf,” by which she meant “the false idol of Zionism.” Klein said, before a gathering of Americans (the majority of whom were anti-war Jews), in a protest calling for an end to arming Israel, which was held in Brooklyn (New York), near the home of the majority leader in the US Senate, Senator Chuck Schumer: “Many members of our (Jewish) community worship a false idol.” ... They are delighted with it... They are drunk... The idol has defiled them... This false idol is called Zionism,” she said, considering that “Zionism is a false idol that took the idea of ​​the Promised Land and turned it into a bill of sale for an ethno-military state.” “It is a false idol that takes our deepest biblical stories of justice and freedom from slavery — the Easter story itself — and turns them into brutal weapons of land theft and colonization, and road maps for ethnic cleansing and genocide,” she added. “It is a false idol that has taken the transcendent idea of ​​the Promised Land, a metaphor for human liberation that has traveled through multiple religions to every corner of this world, and has dared to turn it into a bill of sale to a militaristic ethno-state.”

Also, Klein rejected Zionism's claims about liberating Jews from anti-Semitism and securing them in a Jewish state of their own, saying that "the version of liberation proposed by political Zionism is itself worldly." From the beginning, it required the mass expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and ancestral lands during the Nakba,” noting that “from the beginning (Zionism) was at war with dreams of liberation. It is worth remembering in the Easter celebration that this includes dreams of liberation and self-determination for the Egyptian people. This false Zionist idol equates Israel’s security with the Egyptian dictatorship and client states.”

 Zionism and genocide

Likewise, Klein spoke about the genocidal nature of the Zionist project against the people of Palestine and its immoral essence, saying that Zionism “produced an ugly type of freedom that viewed Palestinian children, not as human beings, but as a demographic threat, just as the Pharaoh in the Book of Exodus feared the increasing population.” Of the children of Israel, and therefore ordered the killing of their children. Zionism has brought us to the present moment of catastrophe, and it is time to say clearly: it always leads us here. “It is a false idol that has led many of our people down a very immoral path, making them now justified in tearing up the basic commandments: Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not covet.”

She also called for protest and the Jews’ exit from Zionism, just as they left Pharaonic captivity, and to disavow the Zionist entity and its crimes, saying: “We, in these streets for months and months, are the exit. Leaving Zionism. It is a false idol that equates Jewish freedom with cluster bombs that kill and maim Palestinian children. Zionism is a false idol that has betrayed all Jewish values, including the value we place on asking questions. “It is a practice rooted in Easter with its four questions asked by the youngest child, including the love we have as a people for text and teaching.” She added: “Today, this false idol justifies the bombing of every university in Gaza. The destruction of countless schools, archives, and printing presses; Hundreds of academics, journalists and poets were killed. This is what the Palestinians call educational genocide, that is, killing the means of education.”

 No to an ethnic Jewish state

“Meanwhile, in this city,” Klein continued, “universities are calling in the NYPD and barricading themselves against the dangerous threat posed by their students who dare to ask them basic questions, like: How can you claim to believe in anything at all, least of all of us, when you By enabling, investing in, and cooperating with this genocide? “The false idol of Zionism has been allowed to grow unchecked for too long.” She added: “So we say tonight: It all ends here.” Our Judaism cannot contain an ethnic state, because our Judaism is international in nature. Our Judaism cannot be protected by the rampaging military establishment of that (ethnic) state, because all the army does is sow sadness and reap hatred, including against us as Jews,” noting that “our Judaism is not threatened by people who raise their voices in solidarity with Palestine. Crossing lines of race, ethnicity, physical ability, gender identity and generations. Our Judaism is one of those voices, and it knows that in this chorus of voices lies our collective safety and liberation.”

Klein added, “Our Judaism is Passover Judaism: gathering in celebration to share food and wine with loved ones and strangers alike, a ritual that is portable by nature, light enough to carry on our backs, and we need nothing but each other: no walls, no temple, no Rabbi, there is a role for everyone, even - especially - the youngest children.” He considered that “the Passover Seder is a diaspora technology if there is one, and it is designed for collective grief, contemplation, asking questions, remembering, and reviving the revolutionary spirit.” So, look around. This, here, is our Judaism. While the waters rise and the forests burn and nothing is certain, we pray on the altar of solidarity and mutual assistance, whatever the cost.”

Liberation of Judaism

Klein added: “We do not need or want the false idol of Zionism.” We want freedom from the project that commits genocide in our name. Freedom from an ideology that has no plan for peace other than dealing with the murderous theocratic petro-states next door, while selling automated assassination techniques to the world. We seek to liberate Judaism from the ethno-state that wants Jews to feel perpetual fear, wants our children to be afraid, wants us to believe that the world is against us, so that we run to its fortress and under its iron dome, or - at the very least - to keep the weapons and donations flowing. That is a false idol.” According to Klein, the matter is not limited to “Netanyahu only, but the world that created it and created it: it is Zionism,” asking, “Who are we?” We, in these streets for months and months, are getting out… Leaving Zionism. And to the likes of the Chuck Schumers of this world, we do not say: “Let our people come out (from the captivity of Zionism).” Rather, we say: We have already left. And your children? They are with us now.” Exit statement finished.

 Resuming the battle against Zionism

The United States witnessed a decisive battle between Reform Judaism and the Zionist project, fought by the American Council for Judaism (the organization of observant American Jews) under the slogan that Jews are not a nationality but a religious group, and that it is necessary to revive the principles of Reform Judaism, whose rabbis have opposed Zionism since before World War First, they supported equal rights for Jews in the countries in which they lived. This battle was led by Elmer Berger (1908-1996), the Reform Jewish rabbi and writer, emancipated from Zionist thought, and who stood against Zionist intellectual terrorism. He contributed to the establishment and leadership of the “American Council of Judaism” with the aim of confronting the establishment of the Zionist state, because it does not represent all Jews in any national or political sense. He devoted his life, efforts, and writings to the issue of Palestine and opposing Zionism, exposing its claims, and warning Jews of its myths and dangers.

It is worth mentioning here that the United States, under the administration of Harry Truman, was the first country in the world to recognize the Zionist state, five minutes after announcing its establishment on May 15, 1948. On that day, everyone thought that Rabbi Elmer Berger and Reform Judaism had been defeated and had lost their battle against Zionism once and for all. But one who contemplates the statement of the Jewish “exit” from Zionism and the repudiation of the “settlement wheel,” in the heart of New York, as well as the popular movement across religions, generations, and races in the streets of the Western Metropolitan and its ancient universities, which was launched by the “Al-Aqsa Flood,” sees the resumption of Rabbi Elmer Berger’s battle against Zionism. The battle is not over, but is being fought with greater energy, broader horizons, and greater momentum.

  

British documents: Britain conducted a secret dialogue with Hezbollah and then sought to exploit Hariri to dismantle his military capabilities

British documents: Britain conducted a secret dialogue with Hezbollah and then sought to exploit Hariri to dismantle his military capabilities

    Wednesday, January 03, 2024   No comments

British documents reveal that British Prime Minister Tony Blair's government sought twenty years ago to use Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri to dissolve the military wing of Hezbollah, which was a pressing American-British goal.

According to the documents, which were recently declassified, Britain conducted a “useful” secret dialogue with Hezbollah, and insisted on continuing this dialogue despite its failure to convince the party to limit itself to political work.

In early July 2003, Blair invited Hariri to visit London after a month of talks between the British Prime Minister and French President Jacques Chirac.

Chirac described Hariri as "a visionary" and "an intelligent commentator on the peace process, especially with regard to the thinking of (Palestinian leader Yasser) Arafat," advising Blair to listen to him, as British Prime Minister's documents indicate.

Despite Hariri's invitation to visit 10 Downing Street (the seat of the British government), the British Foreign Office's assessment concluded that "there is no doubt that Hariri has any special insight into Arafat's motives."

However, the State Department's view was that Hariri "is worth listening to because he is deeply involved in regional politics. At the same time, because of his enormous wealth, he is a semi-independent observer of them." She added, "It is worth exploring what he has, especially with regard to Syrian intentions and (Syrian President) Bashar."

The Foreign Ministry also agreed with Blair's advisors on the need to benefit from Hariri "to determine what the United Kingdom wants from Lebanon." The offices of Blair and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw focused on the issue of ways to deal with Hezbollah... 

Source: BBC

But We Must Speak: Ta-Nehisi Coates and Rashid Khalidi on Israeli Occupation, Apartheid & the 100-Year War on Palestine

But We Must Speak: Ta-Nehisi Coates and Rashid Khalidi on Israeli Occupation, Apartheid & the 100-Year War on Palestine

    Thursday, December 07, 2023   No comments

ISR WEEKLY connects you to a timely and informative program hosted by Democracy Now!:

In this special broadcast, we air excerpts from a recent event organized by the Palestine Festival of Literature at the Union Theological Seminary here in New York. The event featured a discussion between the acclaimed writer Ta-Nehisi Coates and Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi. Coates won the National Book Award for his book Between the World and Me. Rashid Khalidi is the Edward Said professor of modern Arab studies at Columbia. His books include The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine. Their conversation was moderated by civil rights attorney Michelle Alexander.

 

Rap of liberation from occupation... “Lowkey” and the mixture of languages and singing arts in “Palestine Will Never Die”

Rap of liberation from occupation... “Lowkey” and the mixture of languages and singing arts in “Palestine Will Never Die”

    Monday, December 04, 2023   No comments

British rapper Lowkey and his fellow singer Mai Khalil released a remarkable lyrical work entitled “Palestine Will Never Die,” which combines singing and rap, Arabic and English lyrics, and the arts of speech, poetry, prose, and lyrical performance.

Lowkey said that they were inspired to work by the works of the Lebanese artist, singer and composer Ahmed Kaabour, who is known for his works that carry the hopes and pain of the Palestinian people, the most famous of which are “I Call You” and “O Pulse of the West” (In the West Bank I have seven children) and others.

Lowkey added that the song - which is characterized by multiple rhythms and poetry - is “our humble contribution to this just cause and an attempt to empower young people in the West who have a passion for liberating Palestine,” considering that the words gave them goosebumps and reflect the current reality.

He added, "We hope that the song will give more courage and boldness to those who speak about Palestine, so that they are not afraid to confront the Zionist lobby in their countries," considering that the circumstances that inspired the song are "the feeling of impotence and political paralysis... and it is our right in the West to stand in solidarity with our people."

Lowkey pointed out that they chose to mix Arabic and English in the song, because that mix “reflects the reality in which we live,” stressing that they were inspired by traditional words to benefit new generations and deepen their connection to their past.

Regarding the use of different musical genres in one song, Lowkey said that they wanted to prove that "the Arabs are not in a state of cultural schizophrenia. On the contrary, our exposure to multiple arts leads to enriching our abilities to describe our bitter reality."

He said that he sees rap as "an important part of this process, especially how it makes people interact with others directly."   

  

The neocolonial food economy: How Bill Gates and others threaten Africa's agricultural future?

The neocolonial food economy: How Bill Gates and others threaten Africa's agricultural future?

    Monday, September 18, 2023   No comments

A report on the American “The Nation” website, under the title “The New Colonial Food Economy,” by Alexander Zaitchik, author of the book “Owning the Sun” - A History of the Medical Monopoly, spoke about the consequences of the actions of the global billionaire Bill Gates and other business giants in the areas of food. And agriculture, on small farmers in Africa and the countries of the South.

“Last summer, the global trading system finalized the details of the revolution in African agriculture,” the report stated, explaining that “under the project, the trade bodies sponsoring the African Continental Free Trade Area seek to restrict all 54 African countries to a model “It aims to replace farmers’ traditions and practices, which have persisted on the continent for thousands of years.”

He continued, "The main goal is farmers' human right to seeds and crops, and to share and cultivate them according to personal and societal needs."

"By allowing corporate property rights to replace local seed management, the protocol is the latest front in a global battle over the future of food," he adds.

Based on draft laws written by Western seed companies more than three decades ago in Geneva, the new generation of agricultural reforms seek to impose legal and financial penalties across the African Union on farmers who fail to adopt seeds manufactured abroad and protected by patents, including This includes genetically modified versions of local seeds, according to the report.

The resulting seed economy would turn African agriculture into a bonanza for global agribusiness, foster export-oriented monocultures, and undermine resilience during a period of profound climate disruption.

This new seed economy includes not only major seed and biotechnology companies, but also sponsor governments, in a more complex and controversial effort to re-engineer global agriculture for the benefit of biotechnology and agribusiness, not for the benefit of African farmers or the climate, the report asserts.

The author adds, “Tightening ownership laws on farms across the African Union would represent a major victory for global economic powers, which have spent the past three decades campaigning to undermine farmer-run seed economies and oversee their forced integration into global agribusiness value chains.”

These changes threaten the livelihoods of Africa's small farmers and their collective vital biological heritage, including a number of staple grains, legumes and other crops, which their ancestors developed and protected since the dawn of agriculture.

For farmers who are on the path to a global market drive to standardize and privatize their seeds, the risks are simply preserving their right to economic self-determination.

In a statement to the website, one of the farmers warns: “Companies have changed our food culture... They are now using threats to change our agricultural culture. If we replace traditional seeds with foreign seeds that cannot be replanted, what happens if the new seeds do not arrive? It is an attack on our survival!” .

Rights matters: Muslims right to education is superseded by France's commitment to secularism

Rights matters: Muslims right to education is superseded by France's commitment to secularism

    Tuesday, September 05, 2023   No comments

As the new academic year starts, Muslims’ right to education in Europe is denied in order to uphold and enforce secularism. This seems to be the logical conclusion of the events taking place in France this week: Muslim men and women who are wearing traditional clothes are denied entry to schools unless they take off such clothes and wear French style clothes; many refused to do so.

Agence French Presse reports the latest display of European religious tolerance in France with the banning of 67 girls from attending school for wearing the abaya on the first day of the school year. 

300 girls defied a ban on the wearing of the religious garment in protest to the recent ruling by the French government that the long robe worn by some Muslims breached rules on secularism in schools. 

French President Macron had earlier sought to link the wearing of religious dress with the murder of school teacher, Samuel Paty three years ago, saying "we cannot act as if the terrorist attack, the murder of Samuel Paty, had not happened". 

67 of the girls refused to change and were banned from attending classes, ensuring the safety of the Republic from modestly dressed observant school children.

  

Girls in a defiant scene wear abayas in schools despite the ban on the abaya in France..and the authorities send them back to their homes..and the French Council for the Islamic Religion considers banning the abaya an “arbitrary” decision

Late Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron defended this measure, stressing that it aims to defend secularism and the principles of the republic. He also mentioned the terrorist attacks that the country witnessed, especially the killing of Professor Samuel Paty, who was beheaded by a jihadist near his school.

In an interview with YouTuber Ugo Decrypt on his channel, Macron said, "We also live in our society with a minority, with people who change the direction of a religion and come to challenge the Republic and secularism." "Sometimes the worst happened," Macron added. We cannot act as if there had been no terrorist attack and there was no Samuel Paty."

On October 16, 2020, Professor of History and Geography Samuel Paty (47 years old) was stabbed to death in front of his school in the Parisian region, by the Chechen jihadist Abdullah Anzorov, who beheaded the teacher before the police shot him dead. This professor was killed days after he showed his students, during a class on freedom of expression, caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. The jihadist said in an audio recording that he had committed his act "in retaliation for the Prophet."

An association representing Muslims has applied to the Council of State, France's highest court for complaints against state authorities, to issue an injunction against the ban on the abaya and chemise, the equivalent dress for men.

The "Action for Muslim Rights" memorandum will be considered later Tuesday.

According to the law of March 15, 2004, which prohibits the wearing of signs or clothes that show religious affiliation, students in violation are allowed to enter the school, not the classroom, provided that a dialogue takes place between the family and the Ministry of Education. This includes Christian crosses, Jewish skullcaps and Islamic headscarves.

However, unlike the veil, the abaya was not clearly defined within this law.

For its part, the official body representing Islam in France considered on Tuesday that the recent ban on the cloak in schools in France is "arbitrary" and creates "high risks of discrimination" against Muslims.

In the name of the principle of secularism, the French government announced at the end of August the ban on wearing the abaya in schools because of its controversial religious nature. In France, it is forbidden to wear religious symbols in schools under a law passed in 2004.

The French Council for the Islamic Religion considered that the absence of "a clear definition of this dress creates, in fact, an ambiguous situation and judicial insecurity."

This body noted in particular that the abaya can sometimes be considered “Islamic” – and thus prohibited – and at other times “un-Islamic” and therefore permitted.

As a result, the council expressed its fear of “arbitrary control,” as the criteria for evaluating girls’ dress are based on “presumed origin, last name, or skin color.”

Therefore, the authority warns that it reserves the right to take legal action “if the concrete application of this prohibition leads to forms of discrimination.” She added that the cloak "was never a garment or a religious guide."

About 300 female students out of 12 million who started the school year wearing the abaya this week attended schools on Monday, and 67 of them were sent home because of their refusal to comply with the government decision, according to figures announced by the Ministry of National Education on Tuesday.

Banning the abaya in schools is controversial in France, where the left asserts that this measure hides more pressing problems in national education, such as a shortage of teachers.

Keeping our readers informed about the most consequential events in this fast changing world. Manage your Subscription; invite a friend to subscribe to ISR’s Weekly Review Bulletin

Media Review: Africa's French-backed governments are falling one after the other, is Senegal Next?

Media Review: Africa's French-backed governments are falling one after the other, is Senegal Next?

    Monday, September 04, 2023   No comments

Der Spiegel asked the same question: Another pro-French regime is shaking... Will Senegal be next?

The German newspaper "Der Spiegel" indicated that France Afrique's regime had reached the stage of its demise, expecting that Senegal, located in western Africa, and France's last remaining partner in the region, would be the next country to turn against French exploitation of it.

The newspaper said that young people in Senegal "are moving away from France, because they are tired of the clique surrounding President Macky Sall," noting that "he will not run for re-election next year."

The newspaper pointed out that the Senegalese view Sal as a French puppet, and a key element in France's policies in Africa.

And it used to be that the close relations between the candidate and Paris helped in the elections, so that the newspaper indicated that these relations almost guarantee the failure of the ballot boxes in the West African region.

Since last June, the Senegalese opposition has staged mass protests, primarily against the criminal conviction of its leader, Ousmane Sonko, with thousands taking to the streets earlier this month.

The marches have sometimes turned violent, with several people killed since the protests began. Far from simply showing support for Sonko, the demonstrators also targeted French supermarket chains and service stations of French oil giant Total.

And the German newspaper "Der Spiegel" revealed that in European diplomatic circles, there is "a fair amount of ambiguity about the French approach."

In this regard, one of the diplomats said that "Paris does not have mechanisms to deal with the current rejection of everything that is French," stressing that the member states of the European Union have failed to agree on a common position.

Keeping our readers informed about the most consequential events in this fast changing world. Manage your Subscription; invite a friend to subscribe to ISR’s Weekly Review Bulletin

The statements of a Belgian minister about the occupation's violations against the Palestinians and the killing of children raise a diplomatic crisis with Israel.. and Guinness confirms that she does not regret her statements

The statements of a Belgian minister about the occupation's violations against the Palestinians and the killing of children raise a diplomatic crisis with Israel.. and Guinness confirms that she does not regret her statements

    Saturday, September 02, 2023   No comments

The statements of the Belgian Minister of Cooperation and Development, Caroline Guenez, about Israel's violations against the Palestinians, sparked a diplomatic crisis with Tel Aviv, according to Belgian media, while it was welcomed by the Palestinians.

In an interview with the local newspaper "De Morgen", published on Friday, Gennes spoke about the killing of Palestinian children, wiping entire villages off the map, and destroying schools and neighborhoods funded by the European Union.

And according to the website of the Belgian newspaper “HLN”, “Minister Guenez stuck to her words, which caused a diplomatic problem between her country and Israel.”

The newspaper quoted a spokesman for the minister as telling the Belgian media that Guenez "does not regret her statements in the interview."

She added that the minister also referred to "Belgium's support for the two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and if democracy and human rights come under pressure anywhere in the world, we will oppose that," according to the same source.

“Unfortunately, 2023 is the bloodiest year in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a long time, as 218 Palestinians, including 34 children, and 28 Israelis, were martyred,” Guenez said in her statements, which she re-published in several languages on her account on the X platform.

She added, “We have also witnessed the systematic destruction of infrastructure on the Palestinian side in recent months, and this is pushing entire communities out of their villages, and the costs of this infrastructure have often been jointly financed through international support.”

And the Belgian minister added, “I still condemn this out of respect for the efforts of the international community, and a serious conversation is also scheduled with the Israeli ambassador on this issue on September 7.”

For its part, the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates welcomed, in a statement, the Belgian Minister's statements.

And she considered that these statements are “fully consistent with international law and international legitimacy decisions and support the two-state solution and the principles of human rights, as indicated by the (Belgian Minister).”

The ministry condemned "the heinous and unjustified Israeli attack by the Israeli government against the minister and her statements."

And it considered that the Israeli attack falls “within the framework of misleading propaganda and intimidation of parties that criticize the occupying state and attempts to obscure the reality of the historical injustice that the Palestinian people are subjected to, repression, abuse, persecution and racial discrimination that many credible human rights and humanitarian organizations, including Israeli, American and European ones, have talked about.”

In turn, the Palestinian “Hamas” movement welcomed, on Saturday, the statements of the Belgian Minister of Cooperation and Development about Israel’s “crimes” against the Palestinians, especially children.

The leader of the movement, Bassem Naim, said in a statement: "The Belgian minister's statements are completely consistent with the facts on the ground, which were confirmed by several UN reports, especially in light of the current far-right government."

Naim added, "The occupation's reaction to the statements reflects the entity's fear of exposing its myths that it has promoted for decades, and its keenness to keep its crimes away from public opinion and the international media."

Yesterday, Friday, Tel Aviv summoned Belgium's ambassador to France, Jean-Luc Bodson, to express "strong condemnation" after Belgian Minister Guenez's statement about Israel's violations against the Palestinians, according to the "Times of Israel" newspaper.

The Israeli ambassador to Brussels, Edith Rosenzweig-Abu, also said, through her account on the “X” platform, that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs protested to the Belgian ambassador, and asked for clarifications regarding Minister Guenez’s statements.

 

  

Media review: Islamic dress front and center in France again... He who wears a cape or a shirt will not enter his classroom on Mondays

Media review: Islamic dress front and center in France again... He who wears a cape or a shirt will not enter his classroom on Mondays

    Thursday, August 31, 2023   No comments

On Sunday, French Education Minister Gabriel Atal announced that he would ban the wearing of the "cloak" in French schools, indicating that wearing this Islamic dress is a violation of the strict secular laws applied in the field of education in the country.

"Wearing the abaya in school will no longer be possible," Atal said during an interview with French TV TF1. And he stressed his endeavor to set "clear rules at the national level" to be followed by school principals before the start of the new academic year in all parts of France, starting from September 4 next. 

Clearly, the universal values that Macron instructed his diplomats to promote exclude Muslims' rights to dress. 

Here are some of what the French media outlets have said about these issues and the topics they covered.

The French newspaper Le Figaro revealed that the Minister of Education, Gabriel Atal, confirmed today that students who wear the “abaya” for females and the “shirt” for males will not enter their classrooms with the start of the school season on Monday.

The newspaper pointed out that the minister made it clear - in an interview with Radio France International today - that these students will be allowed to enter only the schools that accept their reception and bear the responsibility of clarifying the goals of this government decision to them.

"Behind the cloak and the shirt, there are young girls and boys and families, people with whom we must dialogue through a clear pedagogical method," the minister said.

The French minister was keen to stress that French secularism is one of the main values for the French school, adding that his delay in announcing the details of the implementation of this decision is due to the fact that he entered into discussions and dialogues with directors of educational institutions who were waiting for a clear detail from the government on how to implement it.

The French newspaper stated that some schools include a number of students concerned with this decision, and therefore school officials were in need to clarify the government's position, to provide them with all guarantees for the implementation of the decision.

Le Figaro added that Minister Gabriel Atal confirmed that his ministry will send explanatory notes and a guide to all schools explaining how to implement the decision, along with messages that are supposed to be sent to families.

According to the French newspaper, the new decision to ban gowns and shirts is a continuation of the implementation of the March 15, 2004 law banning the wearing of clothes or symbols that show religious affiliation in French educational institutions.

Prominent French left-wing politician Jean-Luc Melenchon strongly criticized the decision, and called on officials to avoid provoking conflicts of a religious nature.

Le Figaro also quoted Manuel Bombard, coordinator of the France Fatherland Party - which is led by Melenchon - as saying that he would propose to the party's parliamentary group to reject this decision, which he described as dangerous and harsh, and to put it up for review before the Council of State with the aim of proving that it is a decision contrary to the constitution.

And in July of last year, Le Figaro published an investigation that revealed that despite the application of the 2004 law, there is a significant increase in the abayas worn by girls and shirts worn by males, so that they doubled in secondary schools, especially when Ramadan comes, so that some principals They expressed their dissatisfaction and began to wonder why such clothes were so popular.

An official French book defending French secularism had previously spoken of gowns and shirts, and said that the ban was not only related to “symbols or clothing that by nature show religious affiliation,” such as the veil, the Jewish skullcap, and the large cross, but rather related to all symbols or clothing that “do not indicate religious affiliation.” directly to religion, but wearing it is to clearly show religious affiliation.

And the French newspaper Le Point considered - two days ago - that the decision of the Minister of Education, Gabriel Atal, is not an easy decision from a legal point of view, and wondered on what legal basis this ban would be built and what risks could be taken in the event of an appeal before the administrative court.

The anthropologist of religions, Anne-Laure Zwilling, believed that the cloak is not associated with Muslim worship, but rather with "culture", while university professor Claire Geville denounced President Emmanuel Macron's vision regarding education, and saw that "the measure against the cloak may cause more conflict than it will solve a problem," and he said, " From my point of view, this issue, which comes to the fore and dominates everything else, is more a matter of a political agenda than a real educational issue.

For his part, Abdullah Zakry, Vice President of the French Islamic Council, expressed his surprise at the decision to ban the wearing of the abaya in French schools, and called on the French Ministry of Education to issue a statement explaining the reasons that prompted the decision to ban the abaya in schools, and denied that this dress is a religious symbol.

Abdullah Zakry said that the abaya is a form of "fashion" and not a religious garment, expressing his hope that the French Minister of Education had consulted religious authorities before making a decision to ban it.

Macron admits the Western dominated global order is being challenged, calls for revised strategies

Macron admits the Western dominated global order is being challenged, calls for revised strategies

    Monday, August 28, 2023   No comments

In his annual address to French ambassadors, French President Emmanuel Macron admits the Western dominated global order is being challenged, calls for strengthening of France's diplomatic on Monday.

Macron stated that: "The situation in the international arena is becoming more complicated, which threatens the risk of weakening the West and, in particular, Europe. We need to take a sober approach to this, without falling into excessive pessimism ... There is a revision of the world order, its principles, various forms of its organization, where the West has occupied and occupies a dominant position.”

France needs to consolidate its diplomatic strategies as the international context has become more “complex”, Macron told French ambassadors at a meeting in Paris on Monday.

“Our international order is being challenged,” said Macron. “War has returned to European soil, anti-French sentiment is rife, fueled by anti-colonialism or a perceived anti-colonialism that a double standard is being employed,” he said.

“We need to be clear, without being excessively pessimistic,” he said, citing the rise of “new forms of protectionism” and democratic backsliding due to a rise in illiberal powers.

Faced with these risks, Macron said France’s diplomatic efforts should focus on security policy in the context of the war in Ukraine and in bolstering European independence and strategic interests.

The French president also stressed the need to “avoid partitioning the world” over the Ukraine war, at a time when many countries from the Global South have refused to condemn Russian aggression. We must “avoid a narrative that claims, ‘this is Europe’s war, it doesn't concern us’”, he said.

France also seeks to be a “trusted partner” on the geopolitical front, “our diplomatic efforts should keep it simple. We should protect our interests. We should also stand for our principles and our values, which are universal,” said Macron.

 

Keeping our readers informed about the most consequential events in this fast changing world. Manage your Subscription; invite a friend to subscribe to ISR’s Weekly Review Bulletin