Middle Eastern

2024-05-09

and the successful interception of the majority of the missiles and drones launched marked a turning point in the war that began with Hamas’s attack on October 7. This shift has three main aspects: First, unlike the military and intelligence failure of October 7, Israel’s defenses were ready for this assault and were well coordinated with the forces of the United States, Britain, and several Middle Eastern countries. Those who were ready to eulogize Israel after the surprise attack of October 7 learned that it was not a true indication of the capabilities of the IDF. At the same time, it is too early to determine the extent to which this recent success has restored Israel’s deterrence capabilities. The second change was that the attack diverted regional and international attention toward Iran and away from Gaza, the hostages, and the Palestinian issue in general. Finally, the attack created a basis for regional and international cooperation against a common enemy. This stands in contrast to Gaza and the Palestinian issue, which have served as friction points between Israel, on the one hand, and the United States, the West, and the moderate Arab states on the other. However, the successful response to Iran does not alter the fact that Israel remains “captive” in Gaza. That is, not only are 132 hostages still in the hands of Hamas, but without some form of political horizon regarding Gaza and the Palestinian issue as a whole, Israel will remain “captive” in its current regional and international situation. On the face of it, the balance of regional power has not changed dramatically during the war: None of the states that have signed peace treaties or normalization agreements with Israel have withdrawn from them. While Jordan did recall its ambassador from Israel to Amman (not such an unusual occurrence in the history of the two states’ relations), when push came to shove, it stood with Israel against the Iranian attack. THE ABRAHAM ACCORDS signing ceremony at the White House in September 2020: It was an erroneous perception that peace agreements and normalization with our Arab neighbors could be achieved without paying any political price to our Palestinian neighbors, says the writer. (credit: Avi Ohayon/GPO) However, all that aided Israel against Iran chose to play down this fact in their local media. In other words, Israel has returned to its old position in the Middle East, as a “mistress” that Arab countries are willing to be helped by and even help, but behind the scenes. This constitutes a regression. Furthermore, one of the signatories to the Abraham Accords, Sudan, has renewed its diplomatic relations with Iran and is now receiving Iranian military and economic aid. Effectively, Tehran is exploiting the Sudanese civil war to remove the country from the Western sphere of influence and compel it to withdraw from the Abraham Accords. If this effort succeeds, Sudan could find itself serving as a regional weapons depot for Iran, used to arm and finance jihadist organizations , as it did before the Abraham Accords. IN THE LONG TERM, addressing the Iranian threat for Israel and the West relies not solely on military means but also on diplomatic strategies. In this context, two primary courses of action emerge: The first involves efforts to alter the regional power dynamics by enticing neutral or Iran-leaning actors with promises of substantial future benefits. These actors comprise Oman, Iraq, Syria, and notably, Sudan. Oman holds historical significance as the first Gulf state to establish ties with Israel in the 1970s, formalizing diplomatic relations in 1996. In the case of Iraq, it transcends mere alignment with pro-Iranian Shi’ite militias, as evidenced by the Iraqi prime minister’s coincidental visit to Washington during the Iranian assault on Israel. Syria’s historical alignment with Iran contrasts its past associations, notably with Egypt and Saudi Arabia until the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War in 1980. Notably, Hafez al-Assad backed the Western coalition against Iraq during the Kuwait invasion in 1990. Syria recently rejoined the Arab League following the withdrawal of opposition from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and other Arab states. The country is in dire need of massive amounts of aid, potentially paving the way for a shift in its foreign policy. Any such change would likely face opposition from Russia, though its current capacity is constrained by its war with Ukraine. In addition, though Hezbollah is the primary military force in Lebanon, there are many Lebanese—Christians, Sunnis, and even Shi’ites—who oppose the organization and are dissatisfied with the consequences of war for their country. Finally, the possibility should not be ruled out of Sudan returning to the Western camp if the rewards on offer are right. THE SECOND avenue of action focuses on addressing the Palestinian issue. This would entail the development of an Israeli-led plan or initiative, in collaboration with the United States and moderate Arab states, aimed at establishing a credible alternative to Hamas governance in Gaza. The ultimate goal would be to work towards the establishment of a Palestinian state in the long term, while also advancing the process of . Such efforts could potentially pave the way for additional agreements with various Arab and Muslim states, including Indonesia. However, it is important to acknowledge the significant challenges inherent in this endeavor, from the perspectives of both Israel and the Palestinians. Nonetheless, a demonstrated willingness to pursue progress and initiative in this direction could lay the groundwork for a regional diplomatic process and help mitigate criticism of Israel in both Arab and Western public opinion. At present, these ideas may appear to be far-fetched dreams. However, it’s worth noting that not long ago, the notion of Arab countries assisting Israel in a conflict against Iran would have seemed implausible. In light of this, we should embrace the vision expressed in Shimon Peres’s final book title: No Room for Small Dreams. This suggests that even seemingly ambitious goals are worth pursuing, as history has shown that remarkable shifts can occur when bold visions are pursued with determination. The writer teaches in the Department of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and is a board member of Mitvim—The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-30

The Israeli government’s latest decision to allow British independent fact finders to where Hamas members are being detained and to assess whether torture has taken place is unprecedented. Firstly, Israel has a longstanding distrust of foreign bodies, including members of UN commissions who want to charge the country with war crimes and human rights violations. Secondly, the Israeli authorities are officially exposing British officers to facts and situations related to the country’s national security for the first time. In the past, it was only US generals who had the ability to exchange eye-to-eye opinions and reports with their Israeli counterparts. The addition of the United Kingdom to this list of Israel’s confident national security discussants is the first time the Middle Eastern country has made to one of its allies beyond the United States. The fact that of all the European countries, only the United Kingdom is invited to play that role holds its own importance. The history of British intervention in the Middle East is long and mostly painful. Yet, since the termination of its mandate in the Middle East, the United Kingdom has managed little to retain influence over it as a former colonial power. The established State of Israel looked first at France and then to the United States for potential allies, whereas Egypt, occupying Gaza in the first years following the British departure and until 1967, looked towards the Soviet Union. UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak meets with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, October 19, 2023 (credit: AMOS BEN-GERSHOM/GPO) For years, the secret to the US’s success regarding the country’s intervention in the Middle East peace process has been the readiness of the US administrations to demonstrate empathy for Israel’s security concerns. Whereas UN Security Council Resolution 242, shortly after the Six Day War, speaks about the need for Israel to withdraw from territories it occupied but also for Israel’s existence in secure borders, countries around the world have put all the emphasis on the rhetoric about the withdrawal parameter. All these years, after each round of violence, European countries, including the United Kingdom, have just repeated mantras and statements about what the final peace solution should look like. The US has been the only country whose approach is security-focused, with discussions between American and Israeli generals, the sending of security aid, and the support in the UN Security Council of Israel’s operations needed to cover the country’s security needs. Since the current Gaza war started, the United Kingdom has made an equal security-led point by sending defensive equipment to Israel, such as drones that would patrol Gaza’s airspace and trace combatants. The country has also opted to abstain from UN Security Council resolutions calling for an immediate halt to the Israeli Gaza operations or for Palestinian UN membership. Consistently and subtly, since the eruption of the war, British diplomacy has been sending Israel the clear message that, on cardinal national security matters, the latter . Not surprisingly, the Israeli government thanked the British government for its help in thwarting the latest Iranian attack. By showing readiness to also hear the Israeli security concerns, British diplomacy seems to try to reconsider UN Security Council Resolution 242 from a pragmatic perspective. On one hand, London has not ceased , focusing on the resolution’s withdrawal component. At the same time, as the only country apart from the US to have already unveiled a plan for post-war Gaza, the United Kingdom seems to understand that only by placing an emphasis on Israel’s national security needs can it have a role as a credible discussant in the future Middle East landscape. Not by accident, only recently, Israeli War Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz made a stop in London after his Washington trip, an unprecedented step for any Israeli politician visiting the States. It is under this lens that the latest Israeli opening to the United Kingdom should be read. So far, the new British Middle East policy has paid off, building bridges of trust with the Israeli side. It remains to be seen if this will also be the case once the war comes to an end. The writer is an assistant professor at Brunel University London and a former member of the Knesset Legal Department on international and constitutional issues. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-20

The political leadership mulls moving its base of operations out of Qatar, The Wall Street Journal reported. It is understood the Gulf state is increasingly pressurizing the terror chiefs to accept a hostage-for-truce deal with Israel. The Wall Street Journal quoted an unnamed Middle Eastern official as saying the Hamas poliburo chiefs were mulling a move to Oman. Meanwhile Ismail Haniyeh, the top Hamas official in Qatar, will meet with Turkey’s Islamist president Recep Tayyip Erdogan later on Saturday.   🚨Alert sirens sound in northern Israel   Both Israel and U.S. deny being behind overnight strikes on Iraq. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-16

In the volatile tapestry of Middle Eastern politics, the dawn of April 14, 2024, marked yet another escalation in regional tensions. Hundreds of Iranian drones, cruise, and ballistic missiles , punctuating a period of rising hostilities. However, the resilience of Israel's air defense and its strategic alliances in the region not only thwarted this assault but also signaled the durability of the Israel-Sunni regional alliance, as written on Sunday by our Senior Diplomatic Correspondent, Herb Keinon.  The attack underlines a critical reality: the alliance between Israel and several —forged not out of affinity but as a bulwark against Tehran's aggressive postures—remains intact. Countries like the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, and, unofficially, Saudi Arabia view the threat from Iran as overshadowing other regional disagreements. This shared perspective on security issues, particularly Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional hegemony, underscores the necessity of a unified stance against common threats. The recent aerial aggression by Iran serves as a stark reminder of what is at stake. Iran’s actions were not just an attempt to destabilize Israel but also was aimed at fracturing the burgeoning alliances Israel has cultivated with Sunni Arab states. This strategy reflects Tehran’s desire to isolate Israel while diverting global attention from its own military capabilities and nuclear aspirations. Israel’s strategic response to such provocations needs to be as calculated as it is decisive. According to the Post’s Military Correspondent Yonah Jeremy Bob, the Israeli military’s potential use of advanced F-35 stealth fighters to penetrate deep into Iranian territory and target key nuclear sites is a testament to the high stakes involved. Such an operation would likely involve complex navigational challenges, possibly requiring flights over hostile or contested territories such as Syria, Iraq, or even the Persian Gulf. However, the implications of any military action extend beyond immediate tactical successes. The regional dynamics are delicate. The Abraham Accords, which marked a significant realignment in Middle Eastern diplomacy, underscore the nuanced balance of maintaining newfound friendships while deterring traditional adversaries. The coordination seen in the wake of the attacks, involving not just Israel but also its regional partners, reflects a multi-national commitment to security that Iran’s provocations have ironically reinforced. Anti-missile system fires interception missiles as drones and missiles fired from Iran, as it seen over the West Bank city of Hebron, on April 14, 2024. (credit: WISAM HASHLAMOUN/FLASH90) Moreover, Israel’s need to act extends beyond regional alliances. The domestic front is equally critical. The Israeli public’s expectation for security and the government’s responsibility to safeguard this cannot be overstated. The potential use of aerial assaults and missile strikes demonstrates a multi-layered approach to defense, integrating both offensive and defensive strategies. The risks of escalation are real. Iran’s sophisticated air defenses and the potential for retaliation highlight the gamble inherent in military strikes. Yet, the cost of inaction might be higher, given Iran’s continued aggression and the progress in its nuclear program. Israel’s past reluctance to escalate conflicts could shift, considering the current threats that extend beyond its borders to include significant global implications. Israel’s response to the April 14 assault by Iran must be contextualized within a larger framework of strategic defense and geopolitical signaling. This reaction must be interpreted not merely as a response to an isolated provocation but as a cornerstone of a comprehensive strategy aimed at maintaining regional stability and actively deterring future acts of aggression from Tehran. This strategy is about protecting national borders and upholding international norms and the laws of armed conflict, which underscore the legitimacy of a nation’s right to defend its sovereignty against external threats. As Iran continues to challenge regional security, Israel’s military and diplomatic maneuvers must be meticulously calibrated to reinforce its position without escalating conflicts unnecessarily. The events of April 14 should serve as a decisive moment for Israel to reaffirm its strategic imperatives and underscore its commitment to national and regional security. The necessary response from Israel should be robust and multi-dimensional, designed not only to neutralize the immediate threats posed by Iranian aggression but also to project an unambiguous message to both Iran and the international community. This message must articulate that Israel, along with its allies, is fully prepared and capable of confronting and overcoming any threats to its security and stability. Such a stance is vital for deterring future conflicts and reinforcing the integrity of emerging diplomatic relationships in the Middle East.  ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-15

Israeli and American forces intercepted most of the Iranian drones and missiles that were fired at Israel on Saturday night, but they were able to do so, in part, because Arab countries quietly passed on intelligence about Tehran's attack plans, The Wall Street Journal reported. Furthermore, the Arab countries opened their airspace to fighter jets, shared radar surveillance information or, in some cases, provided their own forces to help, according to officials who spoke to the American newspaper.  After Iran decided to attack, U.S. officials began pressuring regional Arab governments to share intelligence information about Tehran’s plans, as well as to assist in intercepting drones and missiles launched toward Israel, Saudi and Egyptian officials told WSJ. The initial reaction of some Arab governments was cautious, fearing that aid to Israel could bring them directly into the conflict and risk retaliation from Tehran. However, after further talks with Washington, the UAE and Saudi Arabia privately agreed to share intelligence, while Jordan said it would allow U.S. and other countries' warplanes to use its airspace, even using its own aircraft to help intercept the . According to the officials, years of American effort culminated in the which broke political and technical barriers that previously prevented military cooperation between Israel and allied Arab governments. Rather than a Middle Eastern version of NATO, the U.S. was said to have focused on less formal air defense cooperation in the region in order to blunt Tehran's growing arsenal of drones and missiles. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-04

DOHA, Qatar – Quite a few Israelis didn’t understand why I was interested in visiting Doha, the Qatari capital, to hold in-depth interviews and conversations with the heads of this small but powerful Muslim country. Public opinion research shows that Israelis have two main conceptions about Qatar:  1. The Qataris host Hamas leaders in Doha, and  2. They send suitcases of cash to Gaza. The oil rich Gulf state is known for soccer after winning the first-ever World Cup in the Arab world.  They have also earned a reputation as mediators in some of the most challenging conflicts around the globe and for their ability to bring home hostages: Americans held in Venezuela, Iran and North Korea, and to repatriate Ukrainian children kidnapped by Russian forces.  But despite their deeds and enormous resources, the world has yet to properly understand their story. People walk past an illuminated soccer ball ahead of the FIFA 2022 World cup soccer tournament at Katara Cultural Village in Doha, Qatar November 15, 2022. (credit: REUTERS/FABRIZIO BENSCH) Telling that story, however, isn’t my business. As an Israeli journalist, I wanted to know precisely how they intend to help us get back all of the remaining 134 hostages, and I wanted to understand why they are hosting Hamas and funding the terrorist group in Gaza, as many of my colleagues and friends have been asking. Before going on this journey to a country with which Israel has no official relations, I consulted many foreign diplomats and Israeli officials who have a deeper understanding of the region.  “They are one of the good guys,” a senior American diplomatic source told me while still in Israel. “There are only a handful of countries in the world that the US sees as its true ally, with 100% faith: Qatar is one of them,” he said. “Qatar is crucial for Israel’s security and existence,” he determined: “Israel won’t be able to survive without cooperating with Qatar.” During almost three full days in Doha, the most senior Qatari government and business leaders tried to explain why they are actually “the good guys.” In the heart of Doha, conversations with senior Qatari officials reveal a multifaceted view of their country’s role in the region, diverging notably from the often-critical external perception. They describe Qatar as not just another player in Middle Eastern politics but as a proactive facilitator of regional stability and global security. Just hours after landing in Doha, I had a three-hour conversation after sundown with a senior official at a family camping site in the desert, about a 40-minute drive from the capital. It is difficult to explain this backdrop in words. However, it resembled a movie site more than a desert retreat. In one of the larger tents where other guests were waiting, I was offered various hot drinks and food. There are showers, bathrooms, a dining area, a volleyball court for the children, and many other smaller tents. We spoke about Israel, Hamas, , and the future of the Middle East. I was blown away by the man’s knowledge about Israel and personal acquaintances with Israel’s previous heads of security agencies. “Qatar and Israel are very similar,” the source said. Israel is under immediate threat, but so are we, as small countries with significant resources and complicated neighborhoods.” All of the senior Qatari officials who spoke with The Jerusalem Post explained that since there are no official relations between the two countries, Qatar has been operating strategically by creating and securing tight relationships with heads of all relevant Israeli intelligence organizations and institutions, refraining from closeness to its politically elected figures. WHILE WATCHING a soccer match on a large plasma screen in his beautiful tent, the senior official explained that Qatar is more beneficial for Israel at this time by not normalizing its relations with the Jewish state. He explained that by being in relationships with all of the Middle Eastern players and financially invested in many of them, they could use their leverage to promote the hostage deal and other essential issues that are under discussion. The country envisions itself as a mediator, actively contributing to global and regional peace efforts. This self-perception contrasts sharply with the skepticism and suspicion that often colors international views of Doha’s actions in the Middle East. Qatar is a gorgeous country. Its buildings are modern and designed down to the tiniest detail. Its excellent public transportation and organized streets, highways, and parking lots make it convenient for people from all backgrounds. Though I donned my kippah (skullcap) in every meeting, I refrained from doing so outside, but that was my decision. The next day, I was allowed entrance to the government headquarters in Doha, in a restricted area. I met a senior security official within , who is also involved in the hostage and ceasefire negotiations.  He assured us that though Hamas has declined to accept the current deal, “the ball is rolling,” and that the Americans have made it clear to Hamas that though it refrained from vetoing a motion against Israel at the United Nations Security Council, it “is interested in an immediate deal which would release all of the hostages as well as a ceasefire.” Many of the Qatari officials I have met reiterated the following mantra: “Qatar is Israel’s best ally in the Middle East.” The exact answers also occurred when asked if this was the case and why they hadn’t normalized their relations with Israel. “We have a strong strategic relationship evident by the close coordination between security apparatuses; not with normalization, since we are more valuable to Israel in this way.” During another three-hour interview, one of the ministers, who deals with security issues, explained: “I’ve been in touch with all of the heads of Mossad, Shin Bet, and COGAT for the past decade.” According to this minister, though former prime minister Naftali Bennett spoke out against transferring Qatari funds to Gaza, the funds continued after a short halt from Qatar’s side as a response to Bennett.  Then, after the situation in Gaza began to deteriorate, a meeting took place in Jerusalem, according to the minister, between representatives of Qatar, Israel, the US, and the United Nations in July 2021. “Israel told us that they want to continue the humanitarian support program of $100 monthly for [each of] the poorest families in Gaza.” Israel supplied the list of Gazans to receive the payment; the funds were immediately returned, and the UN distributed them. The minister also highlighted the fact that 16,000 Israelis attended the 2022 FIFA World Cup games in Qatar. “There was increased cooperation between our two countries, while then director-general of the Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry Alon Ushpiz “agreed to elevate the cooperation,” including discussions of the “maritime border with Lebanon.” The meetings I held in Doha were rare and fascinating. Many interviewees know Israel well, probably better than Western diplomats, which was surprising. Many question marks remain: If they are so optimistic about creating a new and normalized Middle East with all of the moderate countries, why are they allowing Al Jazeera, their official news channel, to report lies about Israel and Jews while ignoring the terrible by Hamas? (By the way, the highest-ranking officials in Qatar admitted, not for attribution, that Al Jazeera is a problem that needs to be solved.) There is also the issue of how Qatari funds influence American universities, where the real problem is very different than what most of Qatar’s haters think it is: it is the influence of American academics who spend many years in Qatar and therefore will teach Middle Eastern studies from a very Muslim focused lens, making it usually anti-Israeli.  Doha’s Education City has brought Western influence to higher education in the Gulf nation. That said, I can find many flaws and problematic behaviors of Jordanians and Egyptians, who aren’t the ideal neighboring countries and who incite against Jews and Israelis daily. The officials in Doha present a perspective where Qatar’s actions, whether as a mediator, a humanitarian aid provider or a host to controversial figures, align with a broader objective of fostering peace and stability, and challenge the common narratives and misconceptions about their role in Middle Eastern politics. All of the Qatari officials underscored that the humanitarian aid and financial support to Gaza, commonly misinterpreted, were in fact actions taken at the request of the Israeli and US governments. This aid was targeted specifically at the poorest families in the Strip, with Qatar meticulously transferring funds to recipients listed by COGAT. Further, the hosting of Hamas leaders in Doha, a contentious issue, was disclosed as a strategic decision also made at the request of the United States. According to these officials, this move was aimed at fostering dialogue and oversight rather than supporting the group’s ideologies or actions. But if Qatar wants Israel and the Jewish community to accept it, they also have to publicly take Israel’s side. They cannot publicly claim that Israel is performing genocide against the Palestinian people when they know that this isn’t true. Al Jazeera cannot broadcast lies about Israel and the Jewish people without being accounted for.  In addition, the Qatari public, as well as the Israeli one, needs to learn more about the other side. Otherwise, we will all be ignorant and uneducated about what is happening in the Middle East. We live in a complicated and sensitive region. Therefore, we need to judge our neighbors according to the complexity of the situation while not risking our security, but we also need to understand that things aren’t black or white. We will continue to seek dialogue and learn about our neighbors, so that our readers can make decisions based on information and facts rather than populistic opinions and trends. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-04-04

In the complex tapestry of Middle Eastern diplomacy, Qatar emerges as a paradox. On the one hand, it positions itself as a mediator and peacemaker, instrumental in negotiating high-profile hostage releases and actively participating in regional discussions, a role that has placed it in the international spotlight in the aftermath of the Hamas led . This role, as articulated by senior Qatari officials during my visit, reveals a nation striving for a larger purpose on the world stage. Their efforts, they assert, are in alignment with the broader objectives of global powers like the US and Israel, aimed at fostering stability in a tumultuous region. Yet, there’s a palpable undercurrent of skepticism about Qatar’s true intentions. Their financial support to Gaza, often labeled as aid to Hamas, as well their policy of allowing that group’s top leaders to reside in their country, is a focal point of contention. Qatari officials contend that these actions are not unilateral, but responses to requests from Israeli and US governments, aimed at stabilizing the region and averting humanitarian crises. They argue that their unique position enables them to mediate complex issues effectively, including the Israel-Hamas dynamics. Despite these explanations, the arrangement continues to spark debates and suspicions in Israel and beyond.KFAR AZA residents call for the release of the hostages, outside Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv yesterday. (credit: Jonathan Shaul/Flash90) As an Israeli journalist delving into the depths of Qatar’s foreign policy and regional actions, I find myself navigating a narrative that’s both enlightening and elusive. Last week, I conducted more than 15 hours of interviews and off-the-record briefings with the most senior Qatari government officials, who asked to remain anonymous. They were eager to share the complex history and current situation of their relationship with Israel for the past several decades, and specifically the vital role they have played in the past six months. Due to the sensitive nature of the subject, the officials have asked to remain anonymous. These visits and meetings are exclusive to The Jerusalem Post. The discussions in Doha paint a picture of a nation trying to balance its global aspirations with regional realities, all while walking a tightrope of diplomatic and political complexities. The Qatari story, as it unfolds, is a reminder of the intricate and often opaque nature of international relations in the Middle East, where every action and intention is closely scrutinized and often met with a blend of hope and suspicion. AT THE HEART of the interviews I held in Qatar was the Gulf nation’s perceived support for Hamas as well as its efforts on behalf of the 253 people, many of them Israelis, seized as hostages in the Hamas-led massacre on October 7, many of whom are still being held in Gaza. The officials were quick to point out that they were put in this complex position vis-a-vis Hamas at the specific request of the United States and Israel, a country with whom it has an open dialogue even though it does not have formal diplomatic relations. When I asked a senior Qatari official about “the Israeli public perceptions that and sends suitcases of cash to Gaza,” he pushed back. These officials underscored that the humanitarian aid and financial support it has provided to the devastated coastal Israeli enclave, commonly misinterpreted, have in fact been actions taken at the request of the Israeli and US governments. This aid was targeted specifically at the poorest families , with Qatar meticulously transferring funds to recipients listed by the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT). Further, the hosting of Hamas leaders in Doha, a contentious issue, was disclosed as being a strategic decision also made at the request of Washington. According to the Qataris, this move was aimed at fostering dialogue and oversight rather than supporting the group’s ideologies and actions. “The Israeli and US governments are those who have asked us to prevent a humanitarian crisis and financially support Gazan citizens, as well as employees of the Palestinian Authority, to maintain a sense of stability in the region,” prior to the Israel-Hamas war, the senior Qatari official revealed. The Americans and Israelis “were also the ones who asked us to let Hamas leaders stay in Doha, as they would rather have them in Doha than in Tehran or Beirut.” It was Qatar’s global resumé of negotiating hostage deals and this relationship with Hamas that allowed Doha to have such a prominent role as a mediator in the hostage deals crisis, officials said, by putting together a potential deal almost immediately. “We approached Israel very soon after October 7 since we were able to agree with Hamas about the release of all civilian hostages,” a senior source close to the Qatari government revealed to the Post last week as he broke his daily Ramadan fast outside of Doha. Israel did not respond so quickly, the source explained.  “We were only answered by Israel on October 16,” he said, stating that Israel was determined to enter Gaza to release its hostages on its own, as well as regain its deterrence. When asked by the Post about the remaining 134 hostages in Gaza, all of the Qatari officials claimed that Hamas wouldn’t share any information about their whereabouts or situation. When asked if they could receive information about who is alive or dead, they all said they weren’t granted that information, though they had requested it. Between 2008 and 2016, Qatar actively mediated in nearly ten regional and international conflicts, leveraging its diplomatic influence to facilitate dialogue and find sustainable solutions without interfering in internal affairs. Its efforts included brokering the Doha Peace Agreement for Darfur, aiding in releasing Djiboutian prisoners of war in Eritrea, securing the release of hostages in Syria, resolving the presidential vacuum in Lebanon, releasing Ukrainian children and striving for Palestinian reconciliation. According to their Foreign Ministry, Qatar’s comprehensive peace approach emphasizes reconciliation, justice, human development, and the promotion of social cohesion through education, public health, job creation, and the defense of human rights. Significant mediation examples include facilitating the US-Taliban agreement, contributing to peace in Lebanon and Darfur, mediating in the Yemen conflict, and intervening in hostage situations in Iraq and Ukraine, and between Israel and Hamas. According to the source, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, the Qatari prime minister and foreign minister, has been meeting with Ismail Haniyeh, chairman of Hamas’s political bureau in Doha, three to four times a week since the outbreak of the war. “Our prime minister has been investing 95% of his time trying to achieve a hostage and ceasefire deal,” the source said. As a reminder: A temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, mediated mostly by Qatar, took place from November 24 to December 1, 2023 – initially allowing for the release of more than 100 Israeli hostages, about 240 Palestinian prisoners, and humanitarian aid entry, with subsequent extensions for further releases. Despite international support for the ceasefire and its extensions, it ended on December 1 following violations. Continued negotiations have yet to yield another hostage release or ceasefire. Hostilities were renewed, including rocket launches and air raids, resulting in casualties. Qatar, with the help of Egypt and the US, brokered the ceasefire agreement. According to the source, 98% of the agreement for the ceasefire, which allowed for the release of 50 hostages, was in their original suggestion to Israel at the beginning of the war – which wasn’t responded to. The first two hostages released by Hamas were Americans Judith Tai Raanan, 59, and her daughter Natalie, 17, who live in Illinois – nearly two weeks after being abducted near Gaza. He explained that Qatar was involved in every step of this release, which was a one-sided decision by Hamas to show that they could supply their side of a potential hostage deal. He elaborated that these two women were released because of “American pressure” and that “it was a tactic for Hamas to cause aerial surveillance to stop without needing to close a deal.” He added: “The operation was very complicated and took 12 hours, and the Hamas representative in Gaza wasn’t able to communicate with the representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) since he didn’t speak English and they didn’t speak Arabic. Our representative in the field was the one who mediated the entire release.” In a different conversation with a senior Qatari government official, the Post asked how they reacted once they saw the news on October 7. “We were shocked, surprised,” he said. “We spoke to Hamas immediately, and they initially said, ‘These are not our people; it went out of control.’” According to this official, “We told them that there is a need for immediate action – to release everyone.” When asked by the Post if Hamas has shared any images or proof of life of any of the hostages, all of the officials responded that they haven’t ever shared such evidence with them. As has been reported previously, toward the end of September and before the massacre, the heads of the Israeli security organizations reached out to Qatar and asked for continued funding of humanitarian aid for the Palestinians, and suggested increasing the number of Gazans given daily work permits after a period of silence. Though all of the Qataris I have met were warm and friendly toward Israel, the statement they published on October 7 was disappointing from a Jewish point of view. “The State of Qatar expresses its deep concern over the developments in the Gaza Strip and calls on all parties to de-escalate and exercise maximum restraint,” an official statement of its Foreign Ministry said. The statement added that Qatar stresses the need “for the international community to act urgently to compel Israel to stop its flagrant violations of international law, respect the resolutions of international legitimacy and the historical rights of the Palestinian people, and to prevent these events from being used as a pretext to ignite a new asymmetric war against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.” There was no word about the hundreds of people being kidnapped and more than 1,200 killed. Asked how the October 7 statement was so one-sided, ignoring anything concerned with innocent civilians being slaughtered, the official explained: “Our statement was based on what we saw and knew on that Saturday. Afterward, we have condemned the killing of all civilians.” On October 8, there was an additional statement, but it was only moderately different. “The State of Qatar reiterated its condemnation of all forms of targeting civilians, along with its call to protect them from consequences of the conflict,” it read. Qatar also promised to promote peace in the region and “to attain a just and comprehensive solution for the Palestinian cause within the framework of the Arab initiative that ensures the establishment of an independent Palestinian State on the 1967 borders with Eastern Jerusalem as its capital.” This statement also doesn’t show any acknowledgment of or sympathy specifically for the massacre of Israelis. When asked why they wouldn’t allow themselves to show any sort of condemnation of Hamas and its brutal actions, the official said, “Put yourself in our shoes. From January 2023, Israel was run by an extreme right-wing government whose ministers made horrible statements every other day.”  Several times, officials mentioned Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir as the reason for this government’s failure on October 7 and for causing what led to it. For example, since Smotrich was also a minister in the Defense Ministry, this led to a situation where the ministry was essentially harmed because of political considerations. “When we realized the reality on the ground, we immediately changed our attitude.” Qatar, officially the State of Qatar, is a West Asian country on the Qatar Peninsula, bordering Saudi Arabia and surrounded by the Persian Gulf, separated from Bahrain by the Gulf of Bahrain. Its capital, Doha, is home to over 80% of its population, primarily in a flat desert landscape. Ruled by the House of Thani since the 19th century and gaining independence from Britain in 1971, Qatar is a monarchy under Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, with a partially-elected assembly having limited legislative influence. Despite a small native population compared to its expatriate workforce, Qatar boasts one of the world’s highest GDPs per capita, significant natural gas and oil reserves, and a high Human Development Index ranking. It has grown into a leading geopolitical player, considered as one of the five closest strategic allies of the United States.  It has mediated the biggest hostage deals in the world: ten American hostages in Iran, six children between Russia and Ukraine, 11 American hostages in Venezuela and one American prisoner in Syria. It is influential through its Al Jazeera Media Network, and active in regional politics, notably during the Arab Spring, while also being a major natural gas exporter. Qatar has also been playing a behind-the-scenes role in helping achieve a regional peace plan involving Israel. At the government headquarters in Doha, behind closed doors, with many security barriers in a restricted area, a senior security official within the Qatari government revealed that foreign ministers of six Muslim countries in the Middle East (including the non-state Palestinian Authority) have recently met and discussed creating a “day after plan” for the PA and Gaza, which includes a Palestinian state as well as Israel normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia and possibly Qatar. The countries are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, The United Arab Emirates (UAE), Jordan, Egypt and PA. The meeting began immediately after the Munich Security Conference in February. According to the source, the finalized plan will be sent to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and suggested to Israel on his behalf, with the support of the five countries and the PA. The suggested plan includes three main elements geared toward creating “regional peace,” according to the source. The first and most pressing is the release of hostages by Hamas and a limited ceasefire. The second is the unification of the foremost Palestinian movements, Hamas and Fatah, into one and “empowering the Palestinian Authority in the right way.” The objective would be to create one Palestinian leadership in Gaza and the West Bank, while the renewed PA would be its umbrella. “The point is to de-radicalize and de-marginalize Hamas and to create a technocratic government (‘not affiliated in any way with Hamas’) for the Palestinians that would later allow genuine democratic elections,” he said. All of the officials who have spoken to the Post have admitted that the current PA is “corrupt” and that the only reason Qatar is still supporting them financially is that “the US and Israel have been requesting that we do so.” The third element is the commitment and investment of all the aforementioned Arab countries in supporting and assisting the establishment of a two-state solution by also creating an international security force in these areas – to ensure the security of both Israelis and Palestinians. “Hamas understands they have shot themselves in the foot and that the US won’t agree to deal with them after the war is over,” the source said. “They understand that they need to change as a movement. Otherwise, they won’t be able to be part of the newly structured PA.” On Thursday, Mohammad Mustafa, the newly elected Palestinian prime minister, established a new government, also taking on the role of foreign minister. An ally of President Mahmoud Abbas, Mustafa was named premier earlier this month. His appointment came with the responsibility of restructuring the PA, which has partial governance in the West Bank.  However, the source shared that Qatar and other countries strictly instructed Abbas only to elect a new prime minister under stringent criteria, which don’t apply to Mustafa. He expressed his and his country’s dissatisfaction with the election of Mustafa and said this was shared with Abbas. The last meeting of this group of countries took place more than a week ago in Kyiv, Ukraine. This source, who has been in touch with all of Israel’s heads of Mossad, Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and COGAT for many years, refuted any sort of support for Hamas, as he explained its role in providing financial assistance, a policy which had the support of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. It was a move that the Israeli governments perceived as necessary to ensure stability in Gaza and provide Hamas with incentives not to launch rockets at Israel, he said. “Up until October 7, we have been transferring $30 million to Gaza through two separate projects administered by COGAT,” the source explained. According to this senior official, Qatar’s first type of donation supports poor Palestinian families in Gaza with a modest sum of $100 monthly for each family. He added that the list of families has been compiled by COGAT and changes periodically, but the money – about $10 million – has reached fewer than 100,000 families. Since last summer, instead of transferring US currency to its unofficial embassy in Gaza, it has implemented a technique at the request of Israeli institutions for prepaid debit cards that are filled with monthly sums and can be used for essential items. The second sum of $20 million, about two-thirds of the $30 m. total, is dedicated to purchasing fuel from an Israeli company and sending it into Gaza in trucks. An additional $35 million is transferred monthly to the PA to pay salaries of its employees, “at the request of Israel and the US as well,” he emphasized. According to this source, Qatari financial support for Gaza has ended as a result of the October 7 massacre due to two significant factors: The inability to distribute the funds and the brutality of Hamas.  Other sources who spoke to the Post while in Doha claimed that on October 7, while the situation was still very unclear, Hamas initially claimed that they weren’t totally behind this attack and that others were more brutal than they were. These statements are reflected in actual documentation: The Times of Israel recently published a document by former Mossad chief Yossi Cohen revealing the financial support invested by Qatar to stabilize the humanitarian situation in Gaza at the request of Israel, in the years and months before Hamas’s October 7 massacre in Israeli communities across the border. “This aid has undoubtedly played a fundamental role in achieving the continued improvement of the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and ensuring stability and security in the region,” Cohen wrote in a 2020 letter to Qatar’s emir. Cohen also expressed his “thanks and appreciation for the humanitarian aid the State of Qatar provided in recent years.” Towards the end of October, Cohen said in an interview with the Post’s Herb Keinon, “If you want to release hostages with Hamas, a designated terrorist organization worldwide, who would be your negotiator?” he asked. “Go to Qatar. This is the only country in the world that could speak with Hamas.” IN JANUARY, Walla News published quotes of Cohen’s criticism of Netanyahu and warned that Doha might leave the negotiating table if the prime minister’s attacks persist. “It is puzzling to me,” the former Mossad chief admitted. “When I was present in discussions in the first days [of the war], I recommended maintaining our relationship with Qatar to the fullest extent possible. “My real worry is that, if we don’t do that, we will reach a crisis too large to overcome,” Cohen said, warning that “Qatar would escape from the negotiating table, and we would be left without effective mediating.” A senior government official explained that Doha won’t return to Gaza alone and will only do so if another country joins them, whether it’s the US or an Arab one. Currently, most other countries aren’t interested in doing so. As for normalization with Qatar, the only way it can happen with Israel, according to this minister, is “it will only be on the table if it is part of a two-state solution deal.”  According to his theory, the UAE and Bahrain signed peace agreements with Israel. Still, it was mainly an issue among the politicians on both sides, and less a genuine normalization. “How many investments has Israel seen from the UAE?” a senior official I interviewed asked, answering, “a lot less than the Israelis have expected.” In addition, he said, “Look at how many Israelis visit the UAE. How many UAE citizens visit Israel as tourists? Barely any.” The next day, in the early morning hours in a beach villa, I met another top official who is familiar with the hostage/ceasefire-deal mediation discussions. Dressed in traditional white clothing, he explained that he was sorry he couldn’t offer the Israeli guests any refreshments or food because it was Ramadan. This top official thinks the solution is straightforward, though implementing it may be more complicated.  “The UN Security Council should recognize a Palestinian state, whose details will be defined by all parties involved within a specific time frame,” he said. “This is good for Israel because it can also take years, but it will give all sides enough time to show they are serious. If someone cannot deliver, they must answer to the international community – or the deal will be canceled.  “This type of agreement by Israel and the US can cause Arab states such as us and Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel,” he said. But a majority of Israelis see the announcement of a Palestinian state so soon after October 7 as an award for Hamas, I responded – and that almost 100 Knesset members voted against the establishment of a Palestinian state at this time. While many in the Israeli political system see Qatar as an enemy of Israel (“We should not accept Qatar as a mediator,” Diaspora Affairs Minister MK Amichai Chikli told the Post in December), the heads of Israeli security forces think otherwise. They have frequently visited Qatar and asked them to mediate on Israel’s and America’s behalf. In an era when Israelis have no faith in their leadership but a restrengthening belief in their security entities, it’s unclear whether the Israeli public would rely for national security issues and strategic relationships on the heads of the Shin Bet and the Mossad or the Israeli government. In the midst of Doha’s modern landscape, the intricate role of Qatar in the geopolitics of the Middle East comes into sharp focus. This exploration reveals a nation deeply involved in the complex dynamics of the region, a role marked by strategic mediation and dialogue in a tumultuous environment.• ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-28

Several years ago, Israeli-Druze social activist Lorena Khateeb visited the in Germany, the only Druze as part of a multicultural delegation of Palestinian Muslims Jewish Americans and Israelis.  This was the first time Khateeb realized the lack of knowledge surrounding Israel throughout the world, and the impetus of her mission to work towards normalizing ties between Israel and the Arab world.   Speaking at the on March 27th, Khateeb served as a symbol of hope for all Israeli minorities that work towards building a more prosperous and peaceful future in Israel and throughout the Middle East. “I realized that as a minority Druze woman living in Israel, a complex reality, I was in a position of influence," Khateeb said. "I decided there and then that I had to play my part." Khateeb said that she understood that by creating digital content in Arabic, she had found a voice to create real change.  Challenging Israel’s preconceived notions on college campuses about Israel, Khateeb began advocating for Israel and organizing awareness campaigns for students in the United States, Europe and even the Gulf countries. She eventually began leading her own multicultural delegations to Poland and the countries under the Abraham Accords, bringing these two societies together. Khateeb quickly learned that many liberties that she had taken for granted growing up in the only democratic country in the Middle Eastern were unheard of concepts for her Arabic contemporaries, who found themselves wanting to learn more about Israeli society. Lorena Khateeb at the Women Leaders Summit (credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM) Since then, Khateeb has taken her mission to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Public Diplomacy Division, spreading awareness of Israel’s rich multiculturalism, of which minority groups make up 25% of Israel’s population. Today, Khateeb serves as the project coordinator of , which aims to bring both the Arab and Jewish sectors of Israel closer together.  She also is the co-founder of the Druze Youth Congress and External Content Manager of the Police Spokesperson Division. Speaking somberly about her experiences in the aftermath of October 7, Khateeb shared how she has been working around the clock to meet with IDF soldiers on base, share videos for the Arabic world from the Western Negev Kibbutzim that were brutally attacked on October 7th, and even initiating the “Arabic in the Living Room” project, teaching displaced Israeli to speak Arabic. Khateeb imparted a sense of compassion and empathy that gives hope for the future. "I know that healing is something that takes place naturally," Khateeb said. "I am sure that the Israeli society will recover, and we will come out of this stronger than ever, united and with even greater mutual respect.  In the meantime, we will continue to cry out for the hostages until they are released home.”   She continued to affirm that she will use her platform to share the stories of the families that were murdered in the terrorist attacks.  She added the importance of sharing the bravery of Israeli women from all ethnic backgrounds, who are often the victims of terrorism and war as mothers send their husbands and sons to fight on the front lines, not knowing if they will return.  Khateeb asserted that the resilience of women is the bedrock of Israeli society. Concluding her speech to thunderous applause, Khaleeb affirmed that, "Together in full partnership with the entirety of Israel society, in all its shades, Jewish, Arab, religious, secular, Muslims and Druze, we will restore Israeli society and build a better future for all of us.” ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-25

Since the in 1979, the US has not developed a long-term strategy toward Iran but instead has made tactical moves to deal with the various conflicting issues with Tehran as they arose. Conversely, from the time the clergy assumed power, Iran has developed a long-term strategy limited not only to staying in power but also to becoming the region’s hegemon without inviting major military retaliation by either the US or Israel on Iranian soil. It is time for the US to develop an effective long-term strategy to stop Iran in its tracks by taking specific measures that do not purposely seek regime change but may well precipitate such a change. The should be based on the creation of a crescent of allied states stretching from the Gulf to the Mediterranean, where the US would expand its military-to-military, economic, and political cooperation with Middle Eastern countries, including the six Arab Gulf countries, Jordan, Israel, and Egypt. The missing link is the “State of Palestine,” which I will address below. The realization of the US geostrategic objective will a) freeze Iran’s regional ambitions and its influence over the Arab states and b) prevent Iran from expanding its and commercial ties with China, thus limiting their influence and imprint in the region to counterbalance the US’ near-dominance. To that end, the US must take several geostrategic measures as the building blocks that would lead to the establishment of the allied crescent. • First, the Biden administration must address Iran’s objective to oust the US military presence in the Middle East, which would allow it to have a freer hand in challenging and intimidating US allies in the region and enable it to increase its influence and prestige. The Biden administration ought to disabuse Tehran of the notion that the US’ so-called pivot to the East is not and will not happen at the expense of reducing the American military presence in the Middle East, by continuously expanding security collaboration with its allies throughout the region. US President Joe Biden’s decision to dispatch two aircraft carriers to the eastern Mediterranean at the start of the Israel-Hamas war was a wise strategic move that sent a clear message to Iran, Russia, and China that the US is determined to keep the Middle East under direct American sphere of influence both politically and militarily. • SECOND, Iran finances and provides military hardware and training to its ‘axis of resistance,’ including Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq, to attack US military installations. Indirect talks between the US and Iran in Oman on January 10, focusing on the increasing threats posed by the Houthis to Red Sea shipping routes and the attacks on US military bases in Iraq and Syria by militia supported by Iran, failed to reach an agreement. While Iran proclaimed to have no control over the Houthis, its representative at the talks stated that his country could use its influence to ensure that all attacks would stop, provided that the US arranged for a ceasefire in Gaza. Being the main supplier of military hardware to the Houthis, including missiles and drones, it is clear that Iran can – if it chooses – stop the Houthis from attacking ships in the Red Sea and must do so unconditionally; otherwise, it will be held responsible and bear severe consequences for its refusal to stop the Houthi attacks.Houthi troops ride on the back of a police patrol truck after participating in a Houthi gathering in Sanaa, Yemen (credit: KHALED ABDULLAH/ REUTERS) Iran uses these groups to do its dirty work. American retaliation against these groups is a price Tehran is “happy” to pay as long as it doesn’t suffer casualties of its own and prevents a direct American attack, especially on its nuclear facilities and other major military industry complexes. The Biden administration must warn Tehran that given its undisputed military and economic support of its militia, the US will view future attacks on any American military or civilian assets as an assault by Iran and that the US will not hesitate to directly attack Iran’s much-prized assets. • Third, Iran does not want to start a war with the US, knowing full well that the US, with its far superior military power, could inflict a devastating blow that could bring down the regime. In this regard, the Biden administration should not state time and again that the US does not want to wage war against Iran. Even though the US has no plan to attack Iran and presumably wants to mitigate Tehran’s concerns about regime change, reiterating this repeatedly makes the clergy feel more secure in their power, and thus, they will continue to destabilize the region through their proxies, “the axis of resistance,” and their direct interference in the internal affairs of several Middle Eastern countries, including Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and do so with near-impunity. • Fourth, Iran views Israel as the obstacle in its quest for regional hegemony. Knowing, however, that Israel is more powerful militarily and enjoys US security guarantees, Iran seeks to neutralize Israel’s nuclear capability by reaching its own nuclear threshold. In this regard, the Biden administration should warn Iran that while the US is still open to negotiating a new nuclear deal, which would lead to a more amenable and constructive relationship, Washington will not stay idle should Iran produce an operational nuclear weapon. This would also alleviate the concerns of those Israelis who are genuinely worried about Iran’s nuclear program. • FIFTH, in spite of the fact that Hamas, Iran’s second most important proxy after Hezbollah, stands to potentially be crushed by Israeli forces, Tehran does not want Hezbollah to engage Israel militarily on a large-scale but only show some solidarity with Hamas by firing short-range rockets on Israeli targets on a limited basis. Iran wants to prevent Israel from invading Lebanon and inflicting massive losses on Hezbollah because it wants to reserve Hezbollah’s military capability for a different contingency, especially if Iran is directly hit by the US and or Israel. The US should make it clear to Iran that the continuing supplies of weapons to Hezbollah, including drones, is viewed as threatening and provocative and will result in imposing additional crippling sanctions. • Sixth, Iran does not want other Arab states, especially Saudi Arabia, to normalize relations with Israel, as this will open the gates of normalization of relations with most of the Arab states, as well as many Muslim countries. The US should carefully consider Saudi Arabia’s four requirements in exchange for the normalization of relations with Israel: the establishment of a Palestinian state, guaranteeing the Saudis’ national security, providing Riyadh with a nuclear development program for peaceful purposes, and allowing the Saudis to purchase advanced American military equipment. Reaching an agreement with Saudi Arabia based on its requirements will be the forerunner for the establishment of the allied crescent from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. • Seventh, Biden must begin the process of establishing an independent Palestinian state, which he has continuously asserted in recent months. Hamas’s October 7th attack on Israel, which led to the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, reaffirmed that the occupation is not sustainable and that Israel must come to terms with the establishment of a Palestinian state, which is the missing link for the creation of the allied crescent. Beyond that, the establishment of a Palestinian state will pull the rug from underneath Iran, which has been exploiting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the rationale behind its vehement refutation of Israel’s right to exist. To that end, the Biden administration should develop a long-term strategy designed to limit Iran’s regional influence by pursuing a new regional paradigm based on what I generally outlined above. The US, which already has a massive military presence in the Middle East, must now move to expand that into a regional security alliance. Based on my research and contacts in the region, every country mentioned above welcomes such an alliance, as they see it as the cornerstone of regional stability. The US should make it clear that the new alliance is not meant to threaten Iran, and in fact, the allied states would cooperate with Tehran on regional security and develop extensive commercial ties if it chose to become a constructive player. To be sure, the Iranian clergy must understand that “business is not as usual.” But if they need a perpetual enemy—the US and Israel—to rally the public to stay in power, they will have to be prepared to face the consequences. The writer is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-11

“I am keeping my voice heard and fighting Islamists, and I also support Israel. I believe Israel is leading this war on behalf of all of us in the Middle East region,” says Dalia Ziada, an Egyptian writer and . She is the executive director of the Center for Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean Studies (MEEM) and the founding chair of the Liberal Democracy Institute. She took a stand after the Hamas attack on October 7 and condemned it. At the time, this appeared in line with Egypt’s official view as well, which has been against terrorism. However, she faced harsh criticism and threats at home and became a target. Ziada says her only option was to flee to the US. She says it’s not just about fighting Hamas terrorism but fighting terrorism in the region, “including Hezbollah, Houthis, and all Iran’s proxies. That is, I believe, the most important thing that Arab countries need to understand. I will keep working on that and keep the pressure [going], and I will keep working on Middle Eastern issues. I could have been killed by some extremists or imprisoned back in Egypt. So here I am, trying to keep things moving forward.” A week before October 7, Ziada was in Washington, speaking at the Atlantic Council about issues. She takes a deep interest in regional issues, including relations between Egypt and neighboring states and other countries, such as Turkey. It’s hard to remember now, she concedes, but before October 7, the big story in the region was the integration of various countries. This included Israel-Turkey reconciliation and the route linking Israel and the Abraham Accords countries.Dalia Ziada (credit: COURTESY TWITTER) For Egypt, it was also a new era of relations. Ziada was in the US speaking about these issues, and she recalls meeting with experts from Israel and Turkey. “The three of us were very optimistic about the eastern Mediterranean, with trends of normalization and reconciliation that had happened over the last several years,” she says. She flew back to Cairo on October 6. “I woke up to the news of the attack on Israeli civilians. It was not reported in Arabic media like this, but rather as a Hamas attack on Israeli soldiers.” She says that a lot of Arabic media sought to whitewash Hamas’s image. She later took part in a viewing of videos from October 7 that was arranged online by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They had invited activists and writers to learn the truth about October 7. “They showed us images from the kibbutzim and cars and the mobile phones of the terrorists. It was shocking and horrific,” she says. Ziada has a following on social media, and she sought to highlight the truth about October 7 to her audience of Muslims, Egyptians, and Arabic speakers. “I received a horrible backlash. It began with radical Islamists speaking about the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists. I am used to these attacks because I have been fighting against them all my life. I thought it would go away after some time. It got worse because the Egyptian state began to get on board and attack me with the radical Islamists,” she recalls. It appears that she became an easy target and a scapegoat at a sensitive time in October, when it was easier for Egyptian authorities to focus criticism on her and a few others rather than pushing people to . Soon after, Ziada says, she discovered that there were legal claims against her. “They are accusing me of threatening Egypt’s national security, spying for the Mossad, and committing high treason. Unfortunately, this could lead to a death sentence or, in the best-case scenario, a life sentence.” She has since learned that everything she had built up in her life, both in Egypt and with opportunities to study abroad in Turkey, was at risk. A university in Turkey canceled her fellowship. Turkey’s government was also taking a hard line, backing Hamas and slamming Israel. “They decided I should not come to Turkey,” she says. So, she went to the US. She wasn’t the only person in Egypt to face this deluge of criticism. Several others were also harassed and left for countries abroad, such as Canada. “I had to leave Egypt within three hours, leaving everything behind, including my family, my car, my house, and all my material possessions. In a minute, I was stripped of everything I had, even my office and colleagues.” Ziada has navigated the complex and changing politics of Egyptian history in the last decades. As a youth activist, she saw the Arab Spring protests and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013, and then its replacement with the current government of i. She was a supporter of the government and condemned the Brotherhood. She believed that it was official Egyptian policy to be against groups like Hamas, which are linked to the Brotherhood. After all, it was such groups that had spread chaos and terror in Sinai back in 2012, in that dark era. “I thought I was in line with what the Egyptian state has been fighting because they have been fighting the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas,” she says. People gather over the Galata Bridge in solidarity with Palestinians, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, following the first morning prayer of the New Year in Istanbul, Turkey January 1, 2024 (credit: REUTERS/DILARA SENKAYA) She believes that Egypt’s reaction to October 7 reflects a complex choice, as do some wider Arabic media reactions. While many of the moderate states condemn terrorism and the Brotherhood, they need to navigate the fact that some people in the region have backed October 7. Some countries also face economic challenges, and it’s easier to distract people by appearing to condemn Israel. Israel had backed Egypt’s war on terror, but after October 7, many countries initially distanced themselves from Egypt. Jordan, for instance, has often critiqued Israel. Today, there may be a shift in the other direction in the Gulf among the UAE and some states that now understand that Hamas has brought ruin to Gaza. The moderate states want to partner with the US and its potential greater role in backing Gazans, for instance. Ziada is passionate in her condemnation of the Hamas massacre. She insists that when you see something wrong, “you have to do something. I saw the scenes of children being killed and women being abused – how women and children were tortured that day. I felt a responsibility to stand up for these people. The lies in our Arabic-language media were too much, portraying the Israeli people as evil when the truth is the other way around. My stance on Hamas has not changed. I always saw it as a n, unlike some others who see it as a terrorist group when it attacks us but as resistance when it attacks Israel. I see it as a terrorist group that practices horrific attacks on Israelis and Arabs. Israel and Egypt are interdependent neighbors. “When we improve our relationship with Israel, the quality of life improves. It’s in our interests to have good relations with Israel. I wanted to bring justice to these people. I’m a civil rights activist. I couldn’t keep silent,” she says. Ziada knew she would get some pushback; she has always been a vocal activist. However, she was surprised by the vitriol she faced and felt a sense of betrayal. But it won’t silence her. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-04

The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has unveiled damning evidence against two United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) employees allegedly involved in the Hamas-led assault on October 7.  In the recordings, Mamdouh al-Qali, identified as an Islamic Jihad terrorist employed as an Arabic teacher at an UNRWA school, can be heard declaring, "I’m inside, I’m inside with the Jews." Another voice, purportedly belonging to Yousef al-Hawajara, a Hamas operative who worked as a teacher at an UNRWA school in Deir al-Balah, is heard stating, "We have female hostages. I captured one." This post can't be displayed because social networks cookies have been deactivated. You can activate them by clicking manage preferences. The revelation comes amidst mounting concerns over the infiltration of terror elements within international aid organizations operating in the Gaza Strip.  According to IDF intelligence, approximately 450 militants, predominantly affiliated with Hamas, hold positions within UNRWA. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant recently identified an additional 12 UNRWA staff members allegedly involved in the October 7 massacre. These revelations have intensified calls for the dismantling of UNRWA, a longstanding demand from Jerusalem. The IDF's disclosures have triggered apprehension among donor countries, leading to announcements of. Such measures raise the prospect of UNRWA ceasing operations in Gaza and other Middle Eastern regions in the coming weeks. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-01

(JTA) — The United States blocked consideration of a Security Council resolution blaming Israel for the dozens of deaths that occurred during the the delivery of humanitarian assistance in northern Gaza on Thursday, as world leaders stepped up their calls for a ceasefire. The US decision to block the veto came hours after a White House spokeswoman called the mass death incident “alarming” and called on Israel to investigate the incident. The Associated Press reported that 14 of the 15 members of the Security Council favored approving the resolution, drafted by Algeria, but that the United States, one of five permanent members of the council with veto power, blocked it, seeking more information about the incident. The text of the draft resolution was not available. “We don’t have all the facts on the ground – that’s the problem,” The AP quoted the deputy US ambassador, Robert Wood, as saying. Israeli officials said troops were escorting trucks to Gaza City  on Thursday when hundreds of Palestinians, who global health officials say are on the verge of a famine caused by the Israel-Hamas war, rushed toward the aid. THE UNITED NATIONS Security Council holds a regular meeting on the situation in the Middle East, focusing on Israel in relation to the Palestinians. (credit: BRENDAN MCDERMID/REUTERS) Hamas officials said that more than 100 Palestinians were killed in the ensuing melee, and blamed Israeli gunfire. Israeli officials say scant gunfire fired as warnings were responsible for 10 Palestinian casualties but said the vast majority of the deaths happened because of a chaotic stampede that they could not easily control. The incident came as the Palestinian death toll topped 30,000 in the war launched when Hamas terrorists massacred approximately 1,200 Israelis on Oct. 7, and took more than . US President Joe Biden and Middle Eastern countries are working to bring about a temporary ceasefire to free more than 130 hostages still held by Hamas in exchange for Palestinian security prisoners, and to facilitate the delivery of much needed relief to the strip. “The events in northern Gaza are tremendously alarming and of deep concern to us,” Olivia Dalton, a White House spokeswoman told reporters in the hours after the mass deaths. “Too many civilian lives have been lost as a consequence of military operations in Gaza.” She said White House officials had been in touch with their Israeli counterparts. “We’ve been in touch with the government of Israel this morning about — to gather information and to request that they investigate and provide more information about the circumstances that led to this tragedy,” she said. Biden in a brief exchange with reporters acknowledged that the incident would complicate his previous optimistic prediction that a temporary ceasefire could be in place by Monday. “Probably not by Monday, but I’m hopeful,” he said Thursday and then when asked in a followup question if the events in Gaza City earlier in the day would complicate the negotiations, he said “I know it will.” World leaders stepped up their calls for a ceasefire in the wake of the mass deaths, with some blaming Israel for what happened. “Deep indignation at the images coming from Gaza where civilians have been targeted by Israeli soldiers,” French President Emmanuel Macron, who had initially been strongly supportive of Israel in the war, said on social media. “I express my strongest condemnation of these shootings and call for truth, justice, and respect for international law.” “Deeply disturbed by images from Gaza,” Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, said on social media. “Every effort must be made to investigate what happened and ensure transparency. Humanitarian aid is a lifeline for those in need and access to it must be ensured. We stand by civilians, urging their protection in line with international law.” Even if Israel releases persuasive evidence that most of the deaths were the result of a stampede and not gunfire, the incident is likely to step up calls on Israel to allow in more efforts to secure Gaza Palestinians. Israel has emphasized the chaos the soldiers faced, releasing drone footage of people rushing toward the food delivery. Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, the IDF spokesman, released an impassioned five-minute address in English arguing that the IDF troops were dedicated to the humanitarian aim of safely delivering the relief. “The Israel Defense Forces operate according to the rules of engagement and the international law,” he said. “No IDF strike was conducted towards the aid convoy. I want to repeat that: No IDF strike was conducted towards the the aid convoy. On the contrary, the IDF was there conducting a humanitarian operation to secure the humanitarian corridor and allow the aid convoy to reach its designated distribution point so that the humanitarian aid could reach Gazan civilians in the north that are in need.”   ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-03-01

Tel Aviv University's (INSS) took to X on Thursday to lament Israel's slow slump down Global Firepower's PowerIndex (PwrIndx) which measures a nation's conventional fighting abilities. Although this year's ranking, 17th, is a slight improvement on , Israel is still outpaced by several local powers and rivals. Israel was ranked as the fourth most powerful state in the Middle East with Turkey (8th), Iran (14th), and Egypt (15th) gaining a better ranking. This is still an overall reduction in ranking over the decade, as Israel had been in 11th place 10 years ago, during which time Iran rose rapidly despite the sanctions imposed on it. An Israeli F15 fighter jet takes off during a joint international aerial training exercise at Uvda military air base in southern Israel, dubbed ‘Blue Flag 2017.’ (credit: AMIR COHEN/REUTERS) There are over 60 different factors through which a nation is given its . This score should represent the country's conventional fighting capability. The factors that determine the score range from manpower, airpower, natural resources, finances, and geography. Importantly, each of these factors encompasses a variety of sub-categories. For example, the manpower category breaks down to total population, available manpower, fit-for-service, and more. A perfect PwrIndx score is 0.0000, however, this is "realistically unattainable" under current conditions, thus the lower the score the more conventionally powerful that country is. The large spectrum of factors allows for a much more precise calculation of each country's Power Projection. While the Data is detailed and expansive, it does not take into consideration the soldiers' ingenuity, passion, dedication, and motivation. The INSS characterized Israel's main advantages as "reflected in [its] technological quality and air superiority," while it characterized the advantages of the Iranian army as "the growth of the drone industry, its extensive scope, and a large armored force." The INSS makes an extremely important point by highlighting the difference in military doctrine and spending, Israel currently outspends Iran by a factor of nearly 2.5x. The INSS did highlight that although Israel had slumped over the decade it still remained in a much better place than most other Middle Eastern states, with Saudi Arabia at 23rd and Israel's neighbors Syria and Jordan much further down, at 60th and 80th respectively. Lebanon was ranked 118th, below Eritrea and above South Sudan, although this likely does not reflect Hezbollah's firepower as it operates separately from the Lebanese Armed Forces. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-02-29

In the ever-evolving geopolitical landscape, the recent announcement of a meeting between representatives of Hamas and Fatah in Moscow marks a significant moment not only for Palestinian politics but also for the broader Middle Eastern dynamics.  Scheduled for Thursday, this gathering aims to discuss the formation of a unified Palestinian government and rebuilding Gaza, reflecting a critical juncture in Palestinian national aspirations. The involvement of Russia as a mediator underscores its growing ambition to assert influence in the Middle East, especially in the wake of its perceived successes in Ukraine. Hamas, recognized as a terrorist organization by several Western countries, holds control over the Gaza Strip and maintains a staunch opposition against Israel, advocating for a radical Islamic state through both political and militant means. On the other hand, is a prominent Palestinian political party and the leading faction within the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which has historically pursued a path toward Palestinian statehood through negotiation and diplomacy. The backdrop to this meeting is a complex tapestry of regional politics, internal Palestinian divisions, and the aftermath of conflict. Days prior, the resignation of Palestinian Prime Minister signals a political shake-up intended to consolidate support for the Palestinian Authority. This move is seen as a response to the conflict in Gaza, underlining the need for a unified front against external pressures and the reconstruction of the war-torn region. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki’s tempered expectations for the talks in Moscow reflect the intricate balance of hope and realism that characterizes the Palestinian approach to these negotiations. “We hope that there might be good results in mutual understanding between all factions about the need to support such a technocratic government that will emerge,” Maliki stated, highlighting the aim for a government capable of navigating the challenging political landscape. However, the shadow of previous failed negotiations looms large, raising questions about achieving substantial progress.Palestinians take part in a protest calling on Hamas and Fatah factions to conclude the reconciliation, in Gaza city December 3, 2017 (credit: REUTERS/IBRAHEEM ABU MUSTAFA) The dynamics between Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), particularly their stance in ongoing hostage talks and the broader context of the Gaza war, introduce further layers of complexity. Israel’s military focus on Rafah and the wider strategy to pressure Hamas underscore the fraught nature of ceasefire and peace negotiations. This reflects the precariousness of the situation and the challenges facing any negotiation efforts. Russia’s role as the host and mediator of these talks is particularly noteworthy. appears to be leveraging its perceived victories in Ukraine to expand its influence in the Middle East. “For Russia, the opportunity to bring together the Palestinians and pressure Israel could come in the wake of their sense of victory in Ukraine,” suggesting that Moscow sees this as an opportune moment to assert its role in the region. This move nevertheless has its challenges. Russia’s capacity to mediate effectively between Hamas and Fatah and, by extension, influence the course of Israeli-Palestinian relations will depend on its ability to navigate the intricate web of regional alliances, rivalries and interests. Moreover, the efficacy of Russian mediation will be tested by the internal dynamics within the Palestinian factions and their relations with other regional powers. The discussions in Moscow, therefore, represent more than just meetings between Palestinian factions; they are a microcosm of the shifting geopolitical currents in the Middle East. The outcome of the talks could have significant implications, not only for Palestinian unity and the future of Gaza but also for the regional balance of power. While the Moscow meeting between Hamas and Fatah offers a glimmer of hope for Palestinian unity and the reconstruction of Gaza, it also highlights the complex interplay of regional politics, internal divisions, and international diplomacy.  The involvement of Russia as a mediator adds a layer of geopolitical intrigue, suggesting a possible realignment of forces in the Middle East. As these talks unfold, the international community will be watching closely, aware that the stakes extend far beyond the immediate concerns of Palestinian governance, to encompass the broader dynamics of power and influence in the region. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-02-28

Iranian hackers reportedly created a fake site in support of held by Hamas to carry out cyber attacks against Israeli targets, the Google-owned cybersecurity firm Mandiant announced on Wednesday.  According to Mandiant, the hacker group identified as UNC1546, or Tortoiseshell, is heavily linked to In its most recent activity, under the cover of the Bring Them Home Now movement, calling for the return of the hostages, the hackers spread malware entitled MINIBUS. Installing it triggered a decoy under the guise of an application related to the hostages.  In an additional MINIBUS incident, a decoy was set via a quiz application.  The UNC1546 hackers also spread links with false job offers related to defense and tech positions, in which were malicious payloads.  According to the cybersecurity firm, as part of the hackers’ activity, the group also targeted Middle Eastern aerospace, aviation, and defense industries, according to the cybersecurity firm. It lists with certitude that Israel and , with Turkey, India, and Albania being additional potential targets.  ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال:

2024-02-24

The US and UK-led coalition struck sites belonging to the in Sana'a and other Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen on Saturday night. The strikes targeted eight locations, including underground weapons storage facilities, missile storage facilities, kamikaze drones, air defense systems, radars, and a helicopter, according to US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. The strikes aimed to "further disrupt and degrade the capabilities of the Iranian-backed Houthi militia to conduct their destabilizing and reckless attacks against US and international vessels the Red Sea, the Bab AI-Mandeb Strait, and the Gulf of Aden," said Austin. "The United States will not hesitate to take action, as needed, to defend lives and the free flow of commerce in one of the world's most critical waterways. We will continue to make clear to the Houthis that they will bear the consequences if they do not stop their , which harm Middle Eastern economies, cause environmental damage, and disrupt the delivery of humanitarian aid to Yemen and other countries," added Austin. ...قراءة المزيد

الكلمات المفتاحية المذكورة في المقال: