Americans Seeking Establishing Greater Israel

According to a report there are growing signs that support Israel has morphed into a religious extremist position. The far-right American voters within the Texas Republican Party have approved a platform that will make it illegal to create a Palestinian State in territories controlled by the apartheid state.

The platform, approved by 5,100 delegates in Houston, supports the "prohibition of a Palestinian State within the historical borders of Israel, as it would jeopardize Israel's security and it would force Israel to give up land that God gave to the Jewish people as referenced in Genesis."

Going beyond all previous anti-Palestinian positions ever adopted by an American party, the GOP platform approved the creation of what is often referred to as "Greater Israel," which will see Israel expand ethno-nationalist Jewish domination to every inch of Historic Palestine.

After decades of ethnic cleansing, artificial re-drawing of borders and population control based on who is and is not Jewish, Israel has managed to wrestle total control of the territory from the West of River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. Currently, as many as 12 million people reside in Historic Palestine, but full rights are granted by the occupation state to Jews only.

The remaining six million non-Jews are subjected to various forms of racial discrimination, depending on their place of residence. While non-Jews are denied full equality with Jews wherever they live, the 1.8 million Palestinian citizens of Israel, for example, have more rights than Palestinians in every other zone of Israeli control.

Though they face various forms of racial discrimination, Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem are granted relatively better status than Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, where the native population has been caged into an "open air prison".

Also, a racist policy enshrined in Israeli law denies some six million Palestinian refugees the right to return to the territory from which they were expelled only a few decades ago. The same law, however, permits every Jew across the world to "return" and settle in any part of Palestine, despite not having any direct connection to the land, other than Biblical claims mentioned in the Genesis.

Such practices, including the racial fragmentation of Palestine into zones of control where half the population enjoys full rights of citizenship denied to the non-Jewish half, every major human rights group has labelled Israel an apartheid state.

As of 2019, 138 of the 193 UN member states have recognized the State of Palestine. Moreover, every UN member, including the US and European countries, are ostensibly committed to the creation of a fully sovereign Palestinian State.

Nevertheless, every major Israeli party explicitly rejects the international consensus and now have found strong support for their radical position from the Texas Republican party in foreclosing any chance of a Palestinian State from ever being established.

Though party platforms do not necessarily translate into government policy, critics cite the former US President Donald Trump and the support enjoyed by Israel amongst powerful Evangelical Christians as well as fringe elements in US society, to argue that the most extreme and rejectionist views about the apartheid state have become normalized in US politics.

Amongst the other policies adopted by the pro-Israel Texas constituency is a proposal to hold a referendum on seceding from the US; a rejection of Joe Biden's presidency; calls for the repeal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which guaranteed Black voters representation.

 

Is Israel a free state?

Freedom in the World publishes a global report evaluating political rights and civil liberties in different countries and selected territories. The 2019 edition of the report includes development in 195 countries and 14 territories between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018.

According to the report, with a score of 80 out of 100, there is only one free country in the Middle East, Israel. Among all Mideast nations, this compares favorably with non-free nations such as Iraq (27), Iran (17), Saudi Arabia (10) and Syria (-1).

Rather than evaluating governments or government performance, Freedom in the World measures the rights and freedoms of individuals in the real world. Political rights and civil liberties can be affected by both state and non-state actors, including insurgents and other armed groups.

The US-based Freedom House said in its latest annual report that Israel is the only "free" state in the Middle East, contrary to claims by the country's critics who say its democratic values are being eroded. "Israel remains the region's only free country," read the report, Freedom in the World 2013, released days before Israel's election.

Independence is a condition of a person, nation, country, or state in which residents and population, or some portion thereof, exercises self-government, and usually sovereignty, over its territory.

But it also means what Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt said. ”With freedom comes responsibility”

A Country is independent of other countries, but it relies on its people for leadership, productivity, development, healthy society, and keeping democracy and freedom alive.

For that to happen we must follow what Jonathan Lockwood Huie said, “Independence of a nation begins with independence of self. “

Israel and the United States of America (US) both claim they are independent countries, but don’t they need each other? Certainly Yes, Israel needs the support of the US with weapons, shared research and development of new weapons, new technologies, new medical research, and mutual ideas for their free countries, and keeping democracy and freedom alive.

The US as well needs Israel, which is the only free and modern Democratic country in the Middle East, as a gateway to Asia and the Middle East, as well as its scientific teams that cooperate with the American researchers, technology developers, etc.

Therefore, it has to be remembered that the independence of the nations starts within themselves, the independence of the people, their hearts, and their speech.

United States condemns killing of journalist during Israeli military raid

The United States government on Wednesday condemned the killing of a journalist during an Israeli military raid in the West Bank and called for an immediate and thorough investigation to determine who is accountable. 

State Department spokesperson Ned Price said the death of Shireen Abu Akleh represented “an affront to media freedom everywhere.”

White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre echoed Price’s comments, telling reporters aboard Air Force One that the administration strongly condemns the killing of the journalist. Jean-Pierre did not say whether President Joe Biden planned to call Abu Akleh’s family.   

Abu Akleh was shot and killed while covering an Israeli military raid in Jenin, a city administered by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

Israel has launched an investigation into Abu Akleh’s death and called for participation of the Palestinian Authority, which has refused. The Palestinian health ministry blamed the Israeli military for the journalist’s death.

Israeli Army Chief Lt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi said that the army could not yet determine whether Abu Akleh was hit by Israeli or Palestinian gunfire. The Associated Press reported, walking back an earlier statement from Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett that the journalist’s death likely came from gunfire from armed Palestinians. 

The Israeli Defense Forces said it was conducting counter terrorism operations in the West Bank city when tens of Palestinian gunmen fired at and hurled explosive devices toward the soldiers and soldiers responded with gunfire. There were no injuries among Israeli forces, according to the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Abu Akleh, 51, was a veteran Middle East journalist who reported for Al Jazeera’s Arabic language channel. She was reportedly shot in the head.

Al Jazeera reported that another one of their journalists, Ali al-Samoudi, was wounded by a bullet in the back at the scene and is in stable condition.

Al-Samoudi told Al Jazeera that there were no Palestinian fighters present when the journalists were shot. 

“We were going to film the Israeli army operation and suddenly they shot us without asking us to leave or stop filming,” al-Samoudi told the Qatari-based news outlet. 

“The first bullet hit me and the second bullet hit Shireen … there was no Palestinian military resistance at all at the scene.”

Abu Akleh’s death comes amid an escalation in Israeli counterterrorism operations in response to a series of attacks made by Palestinians, with at least 18 Israelis and 30 Palestinians killed in recent weeks.

 

World Quds Day Celebrations

The World Quds Day is celebrated every year on the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan. It was designated Quds Day on August 07, 1979 on the initiative of Imam Khomeini to support the Palestinian cause and nation and mark a new stage of solidarity with the people of Palestine.

Qods Day is a unique manifestation of unity among Muslims and all the world’s freedom seekers in expressing support for Palestine and disgust for the Zionists usurper. It illustrates an unparalleled portrayal of unity among the people of the world to condemn the atrocities and occupation of the Zionist regime and abhor the racist and inhuman nature of the Zionists.

Quds Day also symbolizes resistance. Undoubtedly, the establishment of the illegitimate and forged Zionist entity has become the prime element of instability and insecurity in West Asia since 1948. 

The tyrannized and resilient people of Palestine have risen up with the support of the Muslims and free peoples of the world, with a chain of Palestinian intifadas, against this massive oppression by the Zionist regime and have frustrated and depressed this forged entity.

Over the years, the issue of Palestine has transformed into the main issue of the Muslim world at least for three reasons: Firstly, the complexion of the Palestinian land, its sanctity and status among the followers of Islam. Secondly, the nature of the hostility of Zionists, their religious and historical claims and their expansionist and occupationist spirit. Third, the nature of Western-Zionist coalition which pursues to weaken the Muslim Ummah and generate dissension and split between the Muslims with the hope that the Muslim states remain dependent and reliant on the big powers.   

The Zionist regime is considered as the violator of fundamental rights including the right to self-determination of Palestinians and the main element of permanent insecurity in the region.

There are many reasons for this belief. Zionist regime breaches the international law and regulations as well as human rights and takes actions such as imposing collective punishment, blockading Gaza, completing the West Bank separation wall and evicting and displacing more than 5.7 million Palestinians; the Zionist regime assassinates Palestinian and other Arab and Muslim commanders and soldiers, destroys Palestinian houses and farmlands, Judaizes the al-Quds, and promotes and continues settlement constructions in occupied territories; Zionists enforce curfew on the Palestinian citizens of al-Quds and revoke the identification and permanent residence cards of Palestinians (in violation of international rules and agreements especially Article 43 of the Hague Convention and the Fourth Geneva Convention); moreover, the Zionist regime adopted the “nation-state of the Jewish people” bill in Knesset in 2018 and is separating the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza. 

While the criminal and occupation-oriented logic of the kid-killer Zionist regime in the past seven decades has produced nothing but the continuation of occupation, murder, racism and dissension in the region, we regretfully are witnessing that a number of Muslim states have closed their eyes on the persistent crimes of the Zionist regime and have fallen into the trap of the Western-Zionist axis and have committed a historical but reversible and amendable mistake. Unfortunately, normalization of relations of some Arab and Muslim states with the Quds-occupying regime has emboldened the Zionists to expand their hostility. The recent desecration and atrocities of the Zionists in al-Aqsa Mosque testify to such emboldening. The satanic Western-Zionist conspiracy aims to hatch differences among the Muslims and has undoubtedly targeted the unity and solidarity of the Muslim world in supporting Palestine. 

The Zionist regime is regarded as the main source of insecurity and threat to regional and international peace and stability and represents the biggest violator of human rights in the world. The Quds-occupying regime is the only regime in the region which owns tens of nuclear warheads and avoids joining the International Atomic Energy Agency and related safeguards. Against this reality, the West and self-proclaimed Western defenders of human rights, in the past years, have continued military-political supports to the Zionist regime without any restriction. For example, we see how Americans, with double standards, veto resolutions against this regime in the United Nations, Human Rights Council, UNESCO and other international organizations. 

Washington has used its veto power at least 40 times to secure the interests of the Zionist regime. This per se suggests the sort of bias and partisan orientation of the Western policies in support of the Zionist regime and ignoring the fundamental rights of the Palestinians. The international community shoulders a heavy responsibility in this connection and must end its long-term silence and inaction and guarantee the termination of occupation and realization of the right to self-determination and human rights for the people of Palestine. 

The “Saif al-Quds (Sword of al-Quds) Operation” in support of the al-Aqsa Mosque dealt a massive blow to the forged Israeli regime. In particular, this stage is a new beginning for the unity of Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, Occupied Territories of 1948, Palestinian camps and all the Palestinians across the globe. 

Zionist occupiers and their global advocates must know that the determination of resistance will never be tremulous and Islamic and national resistance will continue to exist in various types and forms to support the suppressed people of Palestine. Without doubt, Islamic resistance against the Zionist occupation and diversion in occupied territories, Lebanon, Syria and other Muslim states would pave the grounds for terminating this diversion and purulent gland. As the “Saif al-Quds Operation” indicated, the capacity and capabilities of the Palestinian resistance are strengthening on a daily basis.  

I would like to commemorate the memory of the dignified martyred leaders of resistance such as the great general of resistance and liberation of the holy Quds, Haj Qassem Soleimani, who made continued efforts and wise decisions to fertilize the plant of resistance in so eloquent manner that the resistance movement now constitutes the main pillar of and is pioneer in all effective actions against Zionism and in support of the oppressed.   

The Islamic Republic of Iran would spare no efforts, like the past, in supporting the legitimate and usurped rights of the Palestinian nation. On the basis of the political and democratic plan registered by the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Secretariat of the United Nations, the settlement of the issue of Palestine would be possible only through ending occupation and holding a referendum with the presence of the main inhabitants of the land of Palestine and all refugees to determine their own destiny.

The return of Palestinian refugees to their motherland and holding a national referendum among the original people of this land to shape their destiny and the type of political system is the most effective solution to resolve this crisis. Based on this proposal, Muslims, Jews and Christians of Palestinian descent should be bale to choose the type of legal system that is going to govern their destiny and benefit from its rights freely and equally. This plan, which has been presented based on the principles of democracy and international law as recognized by all governments and nations, could definitely replace the previous failed schemes. 

In conclusion, I would like to ask all the people of Iran and other Muslims in the world as well as freedom seekers and awakened consciences to participate gloriously in the ceremonies and rallies across the globe to mark the World Quds Day to commemorate this great day and express solidarity with the suppressed people of Palestine.   

Key takeaways from Imran Khan’s Address to OIC Foreign Ministers

According to Reuters, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan on Tuesday suggested that close ally China and Islamic countries mediate in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and try to bring about a ceasefire.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is holding the 48th Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers, which more than 600 delegates are attending, including Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi as a special guest, in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad.

"May I suggest that OIC during its discussion with foreign ministers, we should think about how we can mediate, how we can bring about the ceasefire," Khan told the gathering.

"I want to discuss how, maybe OIC along with China, we can all step in and try to stop this conflict which is going to have, if it keeps going the way it is, it would have great consequences for the rest of the world."

Khan's comments came hours after China and Pakistan echoed concerns about "spill-over effects of unilateral sanctions" on Russia, according to a statement by the Chinese foreign ministry.

Khan was in Moscow to meet President Vladimir Putin the day Russian forces entered Ukraine. Pakistan has expressed concern about the repercussions of the invasion but also stopped short of condemning it.

Pakistan abstained from the UN General Assembly vote that condemned Russia's aggression against Ukraine.

According to Pakistan’s leading English Newspaper, Prime Minister Imran Khan delivered a keynote address at the inaugural session of the 48th Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) of Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) at the Parliament House in Islamabad on Tuesday.

While talking about the OIC's role, he said, "We have failed both the Palestinians and the people of Kashmir. I am sad to say that we have been able to make no impact at all."

The premier said Western countries did "not take the OIC seriously" because "we are a divided house and those powers know it.

"We (Muslims) are 1.5 billion people and yet our voice to stop this blatant injustice is insignificant."

Khan said international law was on the side of the people of Palestine and Kashmir, adding that the United Nations Security Council's resolutions backed the right of the Kashmiris to self-determination through a plebiscite. However, the international community never ensured that right was given, he said.

Referring to India's stripping of occupied Kashmir's special status in August 2019, he said nothing happened because they (India) felt no pressure. "They feel we can just pass a resolution and then go back to our usual business."

He said India was changing the demography in occupied Kashmir by bringing in settlers from outside but "no one has pushed about it because they think we are ineffective."

Afghanistan and Ukraine

The premier also spoke about the global situation, expressing his apprehension that the world is "headed in the wrong way".

A new Cold War had almost started and the world could be divided into blocs, he said, stressing that unless 1.5 billion Muslims take a united stand, "we will be nowhere."

No other people had suffered as much as the people of Afghanistan, he said, adding that for the first time in 40 years, there was "no conflict" in the war-torn country. "The only danger now is through the sanctions [imposed on Afghanistan] and non-recognition", which could cause a humanitarian crisis, he cautioned.

Talking about the ongoing war in Ukraine, Khan suggested that the OIC foreign ministers should discuss how the body could "mediate; try to bring about a ceasefire and an end to the conflict".

If the war continued, it would have "great consequences for the world", he cautioned. "All countries that are non-partisan are in a special position to be able to influence this conflict."

He again repeated his suggestion that the foreign ministers discuss the issue, adding that he would also talk about it with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi about how the OIC, along with China, "can influence the events in Ukraine and stop this and have some ceasefire and resolve this conflict".

Meeting agenda

During the two-day conference, more than 100 resolutions will be overviewed. The agenda of the meeting covers a review of the developments affecting the Muslim world since the last CFM held in Niamey in 2020 and efforts undertaken by the secretariat for the implementation of resolutions adopted in previous sessions, especially on Palestine and Al Quds.

The participants would also deliberate on the situation in Afghanistan and India-held Jammu and Kashmir.

Issues pertaining to Africa and Muslims in Europe and developments in Yemen, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Syria, will also be taken up at the meeting.

The agenda, moreover, includes Islamophobia and issues related to international terrorism and cooperation in economic, cultural, social, humanitarian, and scientific domains.

On March 23, foreign ministers will visit the venue of the Pakistan Day parade. Later in the day, FM Qureshi along with OIC Secretary General Hissein Brahim Taha will hold a joint press stakeout following the conclusion of the session.

Ukraine may force Middle Eastern rivals to upgrade their toolkit

According to an article by James Dorsey, struggling to remain on the sidelines of the 21st century’s watershed war in Ukraine, Middle Eastern nations are discovering that they may be fighting their battles with an outdated toolkit.

As a result, the Ukraine war could saw off the legs from under the table of Middle Eastern détente that already are built on shaky ground.

For the past 18 months, Middle Eastern rivals – Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Turkey, Iran, and Israel – have sought to hedge their bets by diversifying their relationships with major powers, the United States, China, and/or Russia.

Increasingly, the rivals are finding out that the Ukraine conflict threatens to narrow their ability to hedge. The conflict has, irrespective of the outcome of the war, reduced not only big power competition to a two- rather than three-horse race but also opened the door to Cold War-style international relations based on the principle of ‘you are with us or against us.’

Even if portraying the Ukraine conflict as a showdown in a titanic battle between democracy and autocracy may be misleading and/or overstated, it does not distract from the fact that the war has shaken, if not undermined, a major pillar of autocracy, Russia.

Even so, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel may privately welcome potential Russian sabotage of negotiations in Vienna to revive the 2015 Iranian nuclear agreement, given that they view it as deeply flawed. Middle Eastern states may also find that the sabotage is one of Moscow’s last hurrahs as it is hit by harsh Western sanctions and drawn into what is likely to be an all-consuming quagmire.

As fears grew of a Russian monkey wrench, Iranian Spiritual Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei defended Iran’s support of militias in various Arab countries, including the Houthis in Yemen who have been firing missiles and drones at targets in the two countries. On Thursday, a Houthi drone attacked a refinery in Riyadh, causing a small fire.

“Our presence in regional issues is our strategic depth… (It’s) a means of power,”  Khamenei told Iran’s Council of Experts that includes the country’s most powerful clerics.

Turkey and Israel have so far been able to package their hedge by exploiting their close ties to both Russia and Ukraine to play the role of mediator even if mediation at this stage of the war has little if any chance of success.

By contrast, Saudi Arabia and the UAE find themselves far more exposed and in the ironic position of sharing a boat with their nemeses, Iran and its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, as they maneuver in a geopolitical minefield. Like the conservative Gulf states, Iran too has sought to remain on the sidelines of the Ukraine conflict.

More fundamentally, the conflict could upset the house of cards on which Middle Eastern détente is built. The driving principle of that détente is to kick the can down the road on significant disagreements over issues, including political Islam and Palestine in favour of closer economic, and in the case of Israel, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and potentially Qatar, closer security cooperation.

This week, Israel Defense Forces chief Aviv Kohavi reportedly discussed military cooperation with his Qatari counterpart, Salem bin Hamad bin Mohammed bin Aqeel Al-Nabi, during an official visit to Bahrain. Unlike Bahrain and the UAE, Qatar has refused to formalize its informal relations with Israel as long as there is no settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine resonates among the Gulf’s smaller states, three of which know first-hand what bullying by larger neighbours in violation of international law means. Iran has occupied three Emirati islands in the Gulf since 1971. Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 while fears of a military intervention accompanied a 3.5 year-long Saudi-UAE-led economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar.

This week, Washington Post columnist Farid Zakaria argued that the Ukraine conflict has ushered in a new era “marked by the triumph of politics over economics. For the past three decades, most countries have acted with one lodestar in mind: economic growth. They have embraced trade, technology, and domestic reforms, all to produce more growth. Those kinds of choices are possible in an atmosphere in which one does not have to worry that much about the core issue of national security.”

That could be as true for the Middle East as it is for much of the world, particularly if sitting on the fence becomes less of an option and fault lines sharpen if the Vienna talks fail.

Already, the crown princes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Mohammed bin Salman and Mohammed bin Zayed, may find that they overplayed their cards when they allegedly refused to take a phone call from US President Joe  Biden to discuss cooperation in increasing oil production to reduce prices.

Mr. Biden ultimately spoke to King Salman, with Mr. Bin Salman listening in although not participating. Mr. Biden had earlier offered to talk with Mr. Bin Salman, breaking a boycott of the crown prince because of his alleged involvement in the 2018 killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Mr. Bin Zayed is proving to be the most overexposed. The UAE has already begun to dither on the oil production with its powerful ambassador in Washington, Yusuf al-Otaiba, suggesting that the Emirates was considering a hike, only for Energy Minister Suhail Al Mazrouei to reiterate the country’s commitment to current OPEC+ production levels.

Emirati officials insisted that the two statements were not contradictory. They said the UAE favoured a production increase but was bound by OPEC+ agreements. OPEC+ is scheduled to meet on March 31.

The manoeuvre was partly an Emirati effort to cover the country’s flank and partly a demonstration of the UAE’s ability to help reduce prices. Oil prices dropped 13 per cent after Mr. Al-Otaiba’s remarks.

The influx of Russians looking for places to safely park their money and assets; leaks about real estate holding of oligarchs in Dubai, including ones belonging to now sanctioned individuals; stepped-up private aircraft traffic between Moscow and Dubai, and the sighting of Russian-owned superyachts off the UAE coast could not come at a worse time.

Earlier this month, the Financial Action Task Force, a Paris-based international anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism finance watchdog, grey listed the UAE for lagging in identifying illicit funds flowing into the country. The listing that groups the UAE alongside 22 others, including Pakistan, Syria, South Sudan, Yemen, and Myanmar, dealt a blow to the country’s image as a go-to global financial hub.

 “What separates Dubai from other traditional havens for dirty money is the amazing secrecy. As a fugitive in Dubai, you can snatch up property, stash your yachts and set up bank accounts with very few obstacles. It’s also one of the few autocracies that’s a destination — rather than a transit location — for illicit flows,” said Jodi Vittori, who co-authored a study of Dubai’s financial flows.

Is Israel-Palestine confederation a plausible solution?

Former Israeli and Palestinian peace negotiators have drawn up a new proposal for a two-state confederation that they hope will offer a way forward after a decade-long stalemate in Mideast peace efforts.

The plan includes several controversial proposals, and it’s not clear if it has any support among leaders on either side. But it could help shape the debate over the conflict and will be presented to a senior US official and the UN Secretary General.

The plan calls for an independent state of Palestine in most of the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, territories Israel seized in the 1967 Mideast war. Israel and Palestine would have separate governments but coordinate at a very high level on security, infrastructure and other issues that affect both populations.

The plan would allow the nearly 500,000 Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank to remain there, with large settlements near the border annexed to Israel in a one-to-one land swap.

Settlers living deep inside the West Bank would be given the option of relocating or becoming permanent residents in the state of Palestine. The same number of Palestinians, likely refugees from the 1948 war surrounding Israel’s creation, would be allowed to relocate to Israel as citizens of Palestine with permanent residency in Israel.

The initiative is largely based on the Geneva Accord, a detailed, comprehensive peace plan drawn up in 2003 by prominent Israelis and Palestinians, including former officials. The nearly 100-page confederation plan includes new, detailed recommendations for how to address core issues.

Yossi Beilin, a former senior Israeli official and peace negotiator who co-founded the Geneva Initiative, said that by taking the mass evacuation of settlers off the table, the plan could be more amenable to them.

Israel’s political system is dominated by the settlers and their supporters, who view the West Bank as the biblical and historical heartland of the Jewish people and an integral part of Israel.

The Palestinians view the settlements as the main obstacle to peace, and most of the international community considers them illegal. The settlers living deep inside the West Bank — who would likely end up within the borders of a future Palestinian state — are among the most radical and tend to oppose any territorial partition.

“We believe that if there is no threat of confrontations with the settlers it would be much easier for those who want to have a two-state solution,” Beilin said. The idea has been discussed before, but he said a confederation would make it more “feasible.”

Numerous other sticking points remain, including security, freedom of movement and perhaps most critically after years of violence and failed negotiations, lack of trust.

The main Palestinian figure behind the initiative is Hiba Husseini, a former legal adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team going back to 1994 who hails from a prominent Jerusalem family. Other contributors include Israeli and Palestinian professors and two retired Israeli generals.

Husseini acknowledged that the proposal regarding the settlers is “very controversial” but said the overall plan would fulfill the Palestinians’ core aspiration for a state of their own.

“It’s not going to be easy,” she added. “To achieve statehood and to achieve the desired right of self-determination that we have been working on — since 1948, really — we have to make some compromises.”

Thorny issues like the conflicting claims to Jerusalem, final borders and the fate of Palestinian refugees could be easier to address by two states in the context of a confederation, rather than the traditional approach of trying to work out all the details ahead of a final agreement.

“We’re reversing the process and starting with recognition,” Husseini said.

It’s been nearly three decades since Israeli and Palestinian leaders gathered on the White House lawn to sign the Oslo accords, launching the peace process.

Several rounds of talks over the years, punctuated by outbursts of violence, failed to yield a final agreement, and there have been no serious or substantive negotiations in more than a decade.

Israel’s current Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, is a former settler leader opposed to Palestinian statehood. Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, who is set to take over as prime minister in 2023 under a rotation agreement, supports an eventual two-state solution.

But neither is likely to be able to launch any major initiatives because they head a narrow coalition spanning the political spectrum from hardline nationalist factions to a small Arab party.

On the Palestinian side, President Mahmoud Abbas’ authority is confined to parts of the occupied West Bank, with the Islamic militant group Hamas — which doesn’t accept Israel’s existence — ruling Gaza. Abbas’ presidential term expired in 2009 and his popularity has plummeted in recent years, meaning he is unlikely to be able to make any historic compromises.

The idea of the two-state solution was to give the Palestinians an independent state, while allowing Israel to exist as a democracy with a strong Jewish majority. Israel’s continued expansion of settlements, the absence of any peace process and repeated rounds of violence, however, have greatly complicated hopes of partitioning the land.

The international community still views a two-state solution as the only realistic way to resolve the conflict.

But the ground is shifting, particularly among young Palestinians, who increasingly view the conflict as a struggle for equal rights under what they — and three prominent human rights groups — say is an apartheid regime.

Israel vehemently rejects those allegations, viewing them as an anti-Semitic attack on its right to exist. Lapid has suggested that reviving a political process with the Palestinians would help Israel resist any efforts to brand it an apartheid state in world bodies.

Next week, Beilin and Husseini will present their plan to the US Deputy Secretary of State, Wendy Sherman and UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. Beilin says they have already shared drafts with Israeli and Palestinian officials.

Beilin said he sent it to people who he knew would not reject it out of hand. “Nobody rejected it. It doesn’t mean that they embrace it.”

“I didn’t send it to Hamas,” he added, joking. “I don’t know their address.”

 

Israeli overindulgence becoming headache for United States

For decades, the primary concern of the United States, under both democratic and republican administrations, is to make sure that Israel is able and ready to defend itself. 

The US citizens pay for expansionist policies and influential lobbies of Israel in the US political power structure, under the justification of securing the country's interests.

The truth is, contrary to what US officials constantly claim, unilateral and unconditional support for Israel always has the opposite effect. Not only has it not resolved the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it also has made the United States ousting from the region a uniting objective for Western Asian populations, giving rise to terrorism and extremism.

Israel's opposition to the US returning to the Iran deal is another classic example of the Zionists' attempt to turn its concerns with removing Iran sanctions into a global one. They argue to the European and the US governments that the deal is flawed and that Plan B ‑ military option ‑ is inevitable. According to the US strategic national security documents, it is in its best interest to establish peace and stability in West Asia and the Persian Gulf.

It is necessary to reiterate that the unequivocal and unwavering support for Israel not only does the United States interests disservice, but it also runs counter to it. It further angers the Muslim nations and encourages masses to oppose and actively target the US interests in the region.

Perhaps it is time for the members of Congress and the Federal government to pay closer attention to Israel playing the victim card and manipulatively globalizing its interests. It is wasting the US tax-payers’ money and putting the lives of the US soldiers in danger, to only secure Israel’s security and its interests.

Therefore, it is clear that the Israeli regime manipulates the US administration to achieve its most wanted objective and interest of taking a strike on Iran by removing its key player. Sadly, the Trump administration succumbed to Israel's demand to make an unlawful killing, leaving Iran with no retaliatory option other than firing a barrage of rockets at Ain Al-Assad Base housing the US troops. The attack, unprecedented as it was, led to several wounded US soldiers, and, above all, it discredited and humiliated the United States in regional and global arenas.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has never recognized Israel as a legitimate state. Therefore, Israeli officials and the Zionist lobbyists in Washington direct their destabilizing activities toward the Islamic Republic and never miss an opportunity to turn the US administrations against the Islamic Republic.

One of the many tipping moments when Israeli officials proved most influential in the US foreign policy decision-making was the unlawful assassination of General Soleimani, which has been admitted to by Israeli intelligence officials.

In an interview with the Israel Channel 12, Tamir Hayman, a former Israeli intelligence chief, acknowledged that the Israeli intelligence services informed the US officials that the Iranian Quds General had been planning on an extensive military operation, in the Persian Gulf, against the American forces. Accordingly, the US forces were on alert for possible Iranian aggression.

Contrary to what the Israeli officials claimed, General Soleimani and his associates flew to Iraq on a civilian airplane to carry a message about “the Baghdad Initiative” to reduce regional tensions, according to Adil Abdul-Mahdi, the former Iraq Prime Minister.

Iran terms holding of Israeli cabinet meeting in Golan Heights provocative

Iranian Foreign Ministry has denounced the provocative move of the Israeli regime to hold a cabinet meeting in the occupied Golan Heights that belongs to Syria.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh described this act as “provocative”, stressing that the occupied Golan Heights is an integral part of the Arab Republic of Syria in line with numerous United Nations Resolutions, especially UN Security Council Resolution 497.

Khatibzadeh added the UN General Assembly has underlined this “undeniable reality” every year that the Golan Heights is part of the Syrian territory.

Settlement expansions and an increase in the number of migrant in the occupied Golan Heights cannot change this reality, he said, adding Israeli settlers should understand that they cannot remain in occupied territories forever, the Foreign Ministry reported at its website.

He also reaffirmed the Islamic Republic’s solidarity with as well as its unwavering and iron-clad support for the Arab Republic of Syria in this regard.

On December 26, the cabinet of Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett voted in favor of a plan that aims to build 7,300 settler homes in Golan over a five-year period. The decision was taken during the cabinet meeting in Golan.

Israel aims to attract roughly 23,000 new Jew settlers to the area occupied during the Six Day War in 1967.

Israel annexed the territory on December 14, 1981, in a move not recognized by the international community.

 

Is two state solution the only option for peace in Middle East?

Lately, former adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu, Mark Regev, wrote about how the two-state solution is problematic when you have the Palestinians refusing to accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state. He’s not wrong, but he’s also not providing realistic solutions for what that means.

It is becoming evident that there is no alternative to the two-state solution unless you either support an apartheid state, or don’t care about having a Jewish majority state. The only option for the survival of a Jewish and democratic state of Israel is a two-state solution where compromises will have to be made for peace.

Both Israelis and Palestinians are refusing to accept reality when it comes to a long-term solution, and in doing so, they have made it even more complicated and unpleasant to find a lasting agreement that respects the rights to self-determination of both peoples.

Palestinian rejectionism is the core reason for the lack of peace and a long-term solution. It is absolutely true that Palestinians have refused every opportunity for peace, and that public opinion is very much against a compromise that allows the state of Israel to exist side by side in peace with the Palestinians.

Fatah and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are cursed at and criticized as ‘collaborators’ with Israel. That being said, it also doesn’t really matter that it is unpopular because there is no alternative.

Palestinians who refuse to accept that the state of Israel is not going anywhere are perpetuating a fantasy that prevents them from moving forward in a healthy and prosperous society, and this will continue as long as public opinion pushes this narrative in schools, television, newspapers, and government.

Perhaps more problematic for the Palestinians than for the Israelis, the longer they wait to actually negotiate in good faith, the less they have to bargain with – a fact even Mahmoud Abbas agreed with when he stated in an interview that the Palestinians were wrong to reject the UN Partition Plan.

On the Israeli side, those who approach the conflict with a zero-compromise attitude about settlements are refusing to acknowledge the reality that Palestinians aren’t going anywhere. The idea that Palestinians should just up and leave to Jordan or any other Arab state is as offensive as it is unrealistic.

Regardless that the land historically belongs to the Jews, and that it is unquestionably part of historical Israel, none of that means that Jews must demand and settle all of it now.

While the Left exaggerates the role of settlements in the conflict, it is important to note that while new settlements (not settlement blocs) are not the obstacle to peace, they are an obstacle.

Palestinians refuse to acknowledge the State of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish (and democratic) state, but using that as an excuse to further develop settlements, or push policies that will make an eventual division more difficult, is paving the path toward conflict and bloodshed on both sides.

Furthermore, refusing to acknowledge the unimaginable damage that annexation (with or without full civil rights to Palestinians) would cause the state of Israel is irresponsible, no matter how far away or unpopular the two-state solution is today.

Opponents of my arguments would rightly point out that when Israel did give up land for peace all it got in return was violence, like in Gaza. Even more relevant, one could argue that if withdrawing to 1967 lines was the key to peace, why was there violence before 1967?

I am not claiming that a two-state solution will bring a warm peace between two peoples. There will still be conflict, likely for a very long time. But the status quo hasn’t brought peace either. Israel has had wave after wave of violence and terrorism, with or without occupation, and by continuing to push policies that make the two-state solution harder to achieve, we are laying the groundwork for worse conflict in the future. Israel can invest in resources that will protect the Jewish and democratic state with less territory instead of taking action to worsen the conflict down the road.

At a certain point, it doesn’t matter who is right or whose fault it was, it matters what can be done about it. Obsessing over Palestinians embracing terrorism and rejecting Israel’s right to exist isn’t going to bring us as Israelis any closer to peace.

The reality is that for Israel and the Palestinians, it is going to take a leader who is willing to commit political suicide to implement a two-state solution, and it is not going to be an easy path. It is, however, going to be even worse if both sides continue in the direction they have been for the past few decades.

No matter how unpopular is the two-state solution, it is still the only chance Israel has for remaining both democratic and Jewish. Israel cannot control what the Palestinians think or that they do not recognize Israel’s legitimacy, but it can take responsibility for its own future and pursue two states. Ultimately, Israel must decide what it wants.

Biden administration shows little progress with Abraham Accords on first anniversary

According to certain reports Biden administration has made little progress in advancing normalization agreements between Israel and Arab and Muslim-majority countries more than one year since they were first established under the Trump administration.

Supporters of the agreements, ‘The Abraham Accords’ say President Joe Biden is missing a key opportunity on an issue that enjoys rare bipartisan support in a polarized and hyper-partisan Congress.

They add that the President can reap tangible successes in the Middle East, including on improving conditions for Palestinians, while taking ownership of a Trump foreign policy success.

The stalled progress is likely to give ammo to Republicans ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections, who seek to skewer the Biden administration over its policy of rapprochement with Iran and reestablishing ties with the Palestinians that were severed under Trump.

Biden administration has also come under fire for appearing to fail to defend Kurdish Iraqis who were condemned, and reportedly physically threatened, for calling to normalize ties with Israel.

“It is beyond unexplainable that the Biden administration is distancing America from this noble effort of the Iraqi people to normalize relations with Israel. We should pray for their efforts, not shun them,” former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tweeted in response to a statement by the US-led coalition to defeat ISIS that denied knowledge of the calls for normalization.

Pompeo, one of the architects of the accords and a potential 2024 Republican presidential candidate, will be in Jerusalem next week to celebrate their one-year anniversary with Israeli officials. 

Also in attendance will be Trump's son-in-law and former special adviser Jared Kushner, who was integral in shaping the deal, along with former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, who will be inaugurating the “Friedman Center for Peace through Strength” to coincide with the celebrations.

The Abraham Accords were first announced in August 2020 as a breakthrough in normalization between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, marking the first Arab country to establish relations with Israel in more than two decades, since Jordan in 1994.

Bahrain was the second country to sign on to the deals followed by pronouncements from Sudan and Morocco to deepen ties with Israel.

“I have to say that it exceeded my expectations,” Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow with the Washington Institute who served as an adviser on Palestinian negotiations between 1999 and 2001, said of the success of the accords.   

“Relations are going strong, embassies are being formally established, economic relations are just only growing … certainly we’re seeing a momentum," he added.

While the trigger for the UAE recognizing Israel was an effort to preserve Palestinian national aspirations — securing a commitment by Israel to halt plans for annexation green-lighted by the Trump administration — al-Omari said that the deepening ties with Abu Dhabi and the subsequent agreements with Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco show how far the Palestinian issue has fallen from the agenda of Arab and Muslim countries.

“In the end it’s invalidated the old paradigm that Israeli peace with the Arabs has to go first with the Palestinian track. These are all transformations,” he said.

Yet including issues related to the Palestinians with prospective Abraham Accord partners could present an opportunity for the Biden administration to secure a key signatory like Saudi Arabia, and move forward its commitments to improving the situation for Palestinians in general, said Michael Koplow, Policy Director of the Israel Policy Forum, a research and policy advocacy organization.

Saudi Arabia, which the Trump administration touted as being close to signing on to the accords, has resisted so far, insisting that normalization with Israel is contingent on Palestinian statehood.

“If countries that normalize with Israel keep this in mind,” Koplow continued. “To say to Israelis, ‘listen there are things [with the Palestinians] that make it harder for us to normalize, and if you stop some of these things, then more agreements can be had’ — that’s a model that we’ve seen work once already and I think it's likely to keep on going.”

The Israel Relations Normalization Act of 2021, sponsored by Rep. Brad Schneider in the House and Sen. Rob Portman in the Senate, calls for the State Department to assess how the Abraham Accords “advance prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”

“The Biden administration has been tepid — to be charitable — on moving forward,” Koplow said. “One challenge is that the model that the Trump administration developed is simply not wise for the United States.”

The Trump administration came under intense scrutiny by both Republicans and Democrats over the basis of the agreements reached with the UAE, Sudan and Morocco.

This included selling F-35 advanced fighter jets and other military sales to Abu Dhabi, removing Sudan from the State Sponsor of Terrorism List, and recognizing Morocco’s claim to the contested territory of Western Sahara.

While the Biden team has allowed the F-35 sale to proceed, it has done little to address the status of Western Sahara for Morocco, or Sudan’s role in the Abraham Accords, which has yet to officially sign the agreement.

While Biden has put forth the possibility of a Washington visit for Sudan’s Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok — raised during a call with national security adviser Jake Sullivan — a high level Sudanese diplomat said they are waiting for the official invitation.

Bonnie Glick, who served as Deputy Administrator of the US Agency for International Development during the Trump administration, called finalizing Sudan’s participation as a “low-hanging-fruit opportunity to have an impact on a Muslim country that needs our help.”

“Sudan probably took the biggest risk of any country that’s signed on to the accords. This is a brand-new government that came to power by toppling an Islamist autocracy,” she said.

“You have a military government that’s trying to transition to a civilian government, and they took a calculated risk and said, ‘We’re going to sign the Abraham Accords.’ And since the Biden administration came in, there has been silence on the Sudan component in particular.”

Biden officials say they are engaged in efforts to expand the accords by adding in new countries. Secretary of State Antony Blinken last month hosted a Zoom call with his counterparts in Israel, the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco celebrating the one-year anniversary of the accords.

“This administration will continue to build on the successful efforts of the last administration to keep normalization marching forward,” Blinken said.

But al-Omari, of the Washington Institute, criticized this event as “muted.”

“It is a fact that the Biden administration has not been, very robustly, involved in building on these accords,” he said.

Despite the absence of the Biden administration, ties are deepening between Israel and Gulf states, largely an outgrowth of more than a decade of secret ties over concerns of Iran’s ambitions in the region and, following normalization, excitement over increased economic opportunities and security initiatives.

Israel is touting as a landmark achievement its pavilion in Dubai at the World Expo; direct flights and exchanges of hundreds of thousands of its citizens with the UAE; and raising the possibility that Oman could be the next country to join the accords.

“We have, I believe, created a change of dynamics and a change of attitude in the Middle East and in the region,” Eliav Benjamin, Head of the Bureau of the Middle East and Peace Process Division at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said in a briefing with reporters Wednesday.

This paradigm shift between Israel and its neighbors, Benjamin continued, is about “being much more pragmatic and practical on dealing with issues that we have at hand.”

United States supports Iron Dome funding for Israel

The US House of Representative passed legislation on Thursday to provide US$ one billion to support Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system.

The standalone bill to ensure the Iron Dome funding passed handily on a bipartisan basis, 420-9, with two Democrats voting present. Eight liberal Democrats and one Republican voted in opposition.

The debate over the Iron Dome funding once again laid bare the internal Democratic divisions over Israel, which have repeatedly flared since they took over the House majority two years ago.

Those tensions flashed on the House floor Thursday as Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the lone Palestinian American member of Congress, spoke out against the Iron Dome funding.

“We cannot be talking only about Israelis’ need for safety at a time when Palestinians are living under a violent apartheid system,” Tlaib said, calling the Israeli government an apartheid regime.

“We should also be talking about Palestinian need for security from Israeli attacks,” she said. 

Rep. Ted Deutch, who is Jew, subsequently abandoned his prepared remarks and angrily blasted Tlaib for having besmirched our ally.

“I cannot, I cannot allow one of my colleagues to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and label the Jewish democratic state of Israel an apartheid state. I reject it,” Deutch said.

The Senate is expected to consider the standalone Iron Dome funding bill at a later time.

Sovereign Palestinian State: Best option for maintaining peace in Middle East

US President Joe Biden said on Tuesday that a sovereign and democratic Palestinian state is the best way to ensure Israel's future. “We must seek a future of greater peace and security for all people of the Middle East,” Biden said in a speech at the UN General Assembly.

“The commitment of the United States to Israel's security is without question and our support for an independent Jewish state is unequivocal,” he said.

“But I continue to believe that a two-state solution is the best way to ensure Israel's future as a Jewish democratic state, living in peace alongside a viable, sovereign and democratic Palestinian state,” he said.

“We're a long way from that goal at this moment but we should never allow ourselves to give up on the possibility of progress.”

The US will help resolve crises from Iran to the Korean Peninsula to Ethiopia, Biden told the annual UNGA gathering.

The world faces a “decisive decade”, Biden said, one in which leaders must work together to combat a raging coronavirus pandemic, global climate change and cyber threats. He said the US will double its financial commitment on climate aid and spend $10 billion to fight hunger.

Biden did not ever say the words “China” or “Beijing” but sprinkled implicit references to America's increasingly powerful authoritarian competitor throughout his speech, as the two nations butt heads in the Indo-Pacific and on trade and human rights issues.

He said the US will compete vigorously, both economically and to push democratic systems and rule of law.

“We'll stand up for our allies and our friends and oppose attempts by stronger countries to dominate weaker ones, whether through changes to territory by force, economic coercion, technical exploitation or disinformation. But we're not seeking — I'll say it again — we are not seeking a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocs,” Biden said.

Biden came to the UN facing criticism at home and abroad for a chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan that left some Americans and Afghan allies still in that country and struggling to get out.

His vow for allied unity is being tested by a three-way agreement among the US, Australia and Britain that undermined a French submarine deal and left France feeling stabbed in the back.

“We've ended 20 years of conflict in Afghanistan and as we close this era of relentless war, we're opening a new era of relentless diplomacy,” Biden said.

He vowed to defend vital US national interests, but said that “the mission must be clear and achievable,” and the American military “must not be used as the answer to every problem we see around the world”.

Biden, a Democrat, hoped to present a compelling case that the US remains a reliable ally to its partners around the world after four years of America First policies pursued by his Republican predecessor Donald Trump.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who begins a second five-year term at the helm of the world ,warned earlier of the dangers of the growing gap between China and the US, the world's largest economies.

“I fear our world is creeping towards two different sets of economic, trade, financial and technology rules, two divergent approaches in the development of artificial intelligence — and ultimately two different military and geopolitical strategies,” Guterres said.

“This is a recipe for trouble. It would be far less predictable than the Cold War,” Guterres said.

The biggest change in Israel in the past year

The biggest change in Israel in the past year was the departure of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after 12 consecutive years remaining in power. The people who made it happen are Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, they did it as a team. 

There is no doubt that they have had a massive influence on Israel in the past year and the changes are likely to continue.

Bennett and Lapid have a history of getting Netanyahu to do things he doesn’t want to do. Back in 2013, the “brothers,” as they were nicknamed due to Bennett’s penchant for calling everyone that, banded together so that Bennett would get into the coalition, despite Netanyahu not wanting him there, and so the haredi parties would stay out, as Lapid insisted. That coalition was a rocky one – even Bennett and Lapid joked they were downgraded from brothers to cousins – and only lasted a year and a half.

Fast-forward to 2021, when Israel held an unprecedented fourth election in two years. Lapid was in the “Never Netanyahu” camp, and had been since Netanyahu fired him from the Finance Ministry in 2014. Bennett said he was leaving his options open; he didn’t think Netanyahu was disqualified, but he was open to other options if Netanyahu was not able to get majority backing.

Though a majority of the Knesset’s seats went to right-wing and religious parties, Netanyahu, once again, could not cobble together a coalition. Parties that once worked with him refused to do so again for myriad reasons: he was under indictment on multiple charges of corruption; he was beholden to the haredi parties; he had broken one promise too many. The parties that were willing to work with him weren’t all willing to work with each other, like the far-right Religious Zionist Party, which refused to be part of a coalition that was dependent on the Islamist Ra’am Party. Bennett and Netanyahu negotiated, but even if Yamina joined the coalition, the numbers just didn’t add up to 61.

Bennett shifted to talks with his former brother Lapid, head of Yesh Atid, the largest party in the anti-Netanyahu bloc. And since Lapid needed Bennett, as well Ra’am, to form a coalition, they were able to make big demands. In Bennett’s case, it was to be prime minister in a rotation agreement, and to go first. Lapid is due to take his place in mid 2023.

With Netanyahu out of the way, the duo got to the business of leading what they call the “change government.”

In many ways, one can look at this government and the one we had several months ago and sigh, “plus ça change.” The Delta variant has Israel in a state of pandemic deja vu – though the COVID-19 vaccine continues to be highly effective in preventing severe illness – and the prime minister and health minister are still constantly urging Israelis to get jabbed. Though, Lapid and Bennett have decided, unlike Netanyahu, to actually engage with the Biden administration on ways to counter Iran, the mullahs’ regime is still moving forward with its nuclear plan and the West is mostly undeterred from trying to negotiate with them despite their aggression across the Middle East, and there have been mysterious power outages and fires in Iran. The incendiary devices still fly in from Gaza and Hezbollah is still threatening us with its missile stockpiles to the north. The price of housing is on the rise and the cost of food has not gone down, etc.

Bennett and Lapid are undeniably different from what came before them. The most obvious change is, of course, in the name and face at the helm. But there’s also a change in attitude. While it’s true that it takes an incredible amount of hubris for someone who only won seven seats in the last election to even think he could be prime minister, this government is structurally immune to the kind of concentrated power that Netanyahu had cultivated. With such a diverse coalition and such a small party within it, Bennett can’t just do what he wants or amass more and more authority under the Prime Minister’s Office, because if he goes too far, if his policies become too partisan, it will threaten the government’s delicate fabric. The same goes for the ministers of Yesh Atid, Meretz, Labor, New Hope, and Blue and White. So far, Lapid and Bennett have handled this delicate dance with relative aplomb, seeming to be perfectly in sync, whether they are talking about Iran and Hezbollah or the pandemic. They thank one another and give each other – and other ministers – credit, something the previous government lacked, as ministers would anonymously grumble.

The government that Bennett and Lapid are leading has the potential to make changes, for better or for worse, far beyond its spirit of partnership. The Health Ministry received a major, desperately needed budget increase. Necessary reforms in the state-funded rabbinate are on the agenda again, with haredim out of the coalition. Climate change is getting more government attention than ever before. The finance minister has leaned into “nanny state” taxes meant to change individual behaviors.

Israeli Defense Minister meets Palestinian President

According to an Associated Press report, Israeli Defense Minister held talks with Palestinian President in Ramallah, the first high-level meeting between the two sides in years. 

The meeting between Benny Gantz and Mahmoud Abbas signaled a possible shift of direction after the near-complete breakdown of communication between Abbas and Israeli leaders in recent years.

It came two days after President Joe Biden urged Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett during a White House meeting to take steps toward improving the lives of Palestinians.

Gantz’s office said he told Abbas that Israel will take new measures to strengthen the Palestinian economy. It said they also discussed security issues and agreed to remain in touch. It was believed to be the highest level public meeting between the sides since 2014.

A Palestinian official said Gantz and Abbas discussed possible steps toward improving the atmosphere. He said this included Palestinian demands for a halt in Israeli military operations in Palestinian areas of the occupied West Bank, allowing unification of families with relatives inside Israel and allowing more Palestinian workers into Israel. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the late-night meeting.

Bennett is a hard-liner who opposes Palestinian independence, as do key partners in his diverse, ruling coalition. But Bennett has said he supports building up the Palestinian economy and expanding autonomy for Palestinians. He also is interested in bolstering Abbas in his rivalry with the ruling Hama  in Gaza.

While Biden supports a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, his administration is focused on interim confidence-building measures. Israel’s former Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, pursued a hard-line policy toward the Palestinians, backed by former President Donald Trump.

The Trump administration took a number of steps, including moving the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to contested Jerusalem. Abbas halted most contacts with the US and Israel in return.

Netanyahu had repeatedly claimed Abbas was not a reliable partner for negotiating a peace deal, a portrayal dismissed by Netanyahu critics as a pretext for avoiding making concessions.

Hussein Sheikh, a top Abbas aide, confirmed the meeting in a statement on Twitter. It took place on Sunday night in Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where Abbas maintains his headquarters.

Bennett exposes his anti peace policy

Palestinians on Wednesday strongly denounced Naftali Bennett for his statements on the eve of his visit to the US and said they do not expect anything to come out of the first meeting between an Israeli Prime Minister and President Joe Biden.

Bennett’s statements show that there is no real difference between him and his predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu, according to Palestinian officials, who accused the prime minister of “sabotaging” efforts to revive the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Bennett, in an interview with The New York Times, said there would not be resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians for the foreseeable future. He said that his government will neither annex any part of the West Bank nor establish a Palestinian state.

Peace talks will not happen, partly because the Palestinian leadership is fractured and rudderless, he said.

“This government is a government that will make dramatic breakthroughs in the economy. Its claim to fame will not be solving the 130-year-old conflict here in Israel,” he said.

Bennett said the government will continue the standard policy of “natural growth” in the settlements, adding that “Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It’s not the capital of other nations.”

In response, the Palestinian Authority Foreign Ministry said that Bennett has “clearly and frankly exposed his anti-peace positions” on the eve of his meeting with Biden.

The ministry pointed out that Bennett affirmed ahead of his visit to Washington his opposition to a Palestinian state and his support for settlement “expansion,” as well as his refusal to hold peace talks with the Palestinians.

 “These statements constitute redlines and preconditions ahead of Bennett’s meeting with Biden,” the ministry said in a statement. “This is an attempt to stave off pressure or advice from the Biden administration regarding Israeli-Palestinian relations, settlements, or any American effort to pave the way for the resumption of the peace process.”

The PA ministry accused Bennett of “disregarding” the Biden administration and international resolutions pertaining to the Israeli-Arab conflict.

It also accused him of “sabotaging” Arab and American efforts to “create a positive atmosphere for relaunching meaningful negotiations” between Israel and the Palestinians.

“It’s clear that Bennett is trying to create confusion in order to influence the priorities of US foreign policy with the purpose of marginalizing the Palestinian issue,” the ministry charged.

It claimed that the prime minister was trying to hide his “extremist right-wing” positions by offering the Palestinians a number of gestures as part of confidence-building measures between the two sides. The gestures he is talking about are already part of Israel’s obligations as an “occupying power,” the ministry argued.

“Bennett departed to the US, leaving behind occupation bulldozers that are devouring Palestinian lands for building and expanding settlements,” it said.

AZZAM AL-AHMAD, a senior official with the ruling Fatah faction headed by PA President Mahmoud Abbas, said the Palestinians were not pinning any hopes on the Bennett-Biden talks. The visit will not produce anything meaningful for the peace process, Al-Ahmad said.

He called on the Arab countries and European Union members to pressure the Biden administration to clarify its policies toward the Middle East, specifically the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Another senior Palestinian official in Ramallah said the Palestinians were ready to return to the negotiating table with Israel, “but only under the umbrella of the United Nations and the international community.”

The Palestinians, however, do not believe that the Bennett government is interested in resuming peace talks with the Palestinians, “because it includes far-right parties and politicians who are strongly opposed to the two-state solution,” the official said.

“Bennett’s remarks on the eve of his visit to the US are a clear indication that the Biden administration is wasting its time by talking about the revival of the peace process and its support for the two-state solution.”

Commenting on Bennett’s statements, Hussein al-Sheikh, head of the PA’s General Authority of Civil Affairs, said that “Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Palestine, regardless of whoever admits it. Occupation and apartheid will not remain. The establishment of the Palestinian state does not require the permission of the occupation.”

Fatah Central Committee secretary-general Jibril Rajoub said the Palestinians were not surprised by Bennett’s statements, which came as a “blow” to the US administration and the international community.

“Those who should be surprised are the Biden administration and the international community, because these statements are a clear challenge to international resolutions,” Rajoub told the PA’s Voice of Palestine radio station.

Dimitri Diliani, spokesman for the Democratic Reform Current headed by ousted Fatah leader Mohammad Dahlan, said that as far as the Palestinians are concerned, Bennett’s visit to Washington bears “no political significance,” because of the “weakness of the official Palestinian diplomatic apparatus.”

Diliani accused the PA of failing to keep the Palestinian issue at the top of the US administration’s list of priorities.

He said that Bennett’s remarks on the eve of his arrival in Washington exposed his “extremist right-wing agenda that is hostile to peace and stability.”

Diliani also said he does not expect the Bennett-Biden summit to produce anything good for the Palestinians, especially regarding the peace process with Israel.

Ill-timed visit of Bennett to United States

I may not be an admirer of Israeli Prime Minister, Natfali Bennett, but certainly dismayed at the bad timing of his visit to the United States. He has gone there with ambitious plan, but may not succeed in getting even sympathetic hearing.

His visit must have been scheduled, when no one had thought Taliban would be taking control of the entire Afghanistan. Now, the US president and his team are up to neck in Afghan due to very tight evacuation schedule and likely fallout, in case they fail in meeting 31st August 2021 deadline.

Despite hating it, the US is too eager in avoiding any bloody encounters at this juncture, resulting in accepting some of the conditions of Taliban. It is on record that Afghanistan has resumed buying petroleum products from Iran, despite the US sanctions in place.

Similarly, Iran-backed Hezbollah of Lebanon has announced to buy petroleum products from Iran. It has also warned all the foes not to make any attempt to stop movement of ships carrying Iranian products. Israel has expressed its dismay on the decision and it was feared that some mysterious actions may be taken to disrupt supply.

Naftali Bennett landed early Wednesday in the United States, kicking off his first state visit overseas since taking office.The trip comes in the midst of heightened tensions with Jerusalem’s regional enemy Iran, and as Israel grapples with a gradual resurgence of hostilities on its southern border with the Gaza Strip.

Bennett, who landed at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland, was scheduled to meet Wednesday with senior US administration officials, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, and on Thursday with President Biden.

In a statement released by the Prime Minister’s Office before his departure, Bennett said the top priority in his conversation with Biden would be Iran, “especially the leapfrogging in the past two to three years in the Iranian nuclear program.”

He said other issues would also be discussed, including preserving Israel’s qualitative military edge in the Middle East, confronting the coronavirus pandemic and economic matters.

Bennett has spoken out against the possibility of a new nuclear accord between Iran and world powers, and says that any agreement must also put the brakes on Iran’s regional aggression.

Earlier this week, Bennett told the cabinet that he would tell the American president “that now is the time to halt the Iranians, to stop this thing,” and not to reenter “a nuclear deal that has already expired and is not relevant, even to those who thought it was once relevant.”

Bennett repeated that stance Tuesday in a Zoom call with US congressmen.

 “There’s a new government in the US and a new government in Israel, and I bring with me from Jerusalem a new spirit of cooperation, and this rests on the special and long relationship between the two countries,” Bennett said before takeoff.

Bennett took office two months ago after cobbling together a ruling coalition of eight disparate political parties — ranging from right-wing parties to the Islamist Ra’am faction — that ousted longtime leader Benjamin Netanyahu from office following the country’s fourth consecutive parliamentary election in two years.

Ahead of his US trip, Bennett told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday that he would neither annex West Bank territory nor allow it to become a Palestinian state, since the left-to-right composition of his coalition government meant that drastic diplomatic moves in either direction were off the table for now.

Do Israelis comprise of settlers and occupiers only?

"There are no people in the Israeli entity, they are all occupiers and settlers," said Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah during a speech on Monday afternoon. The speech was delivered at the opening of a conference titled "Palestine is Victorious," convened in Lebanon in order to renew media discourse and manage the conflict with Israel.

Nasrallah did not specify whether Arab Israelis were also considered occupiers and settlers.

With tensions rising between the United States and pro-Iranian militias in Syria and Iraq, Nasrallah stressed on Monday that Hezbollah is "facing the American hegemony" in Iraq and Syria.

The Hezbollah leader added that the conflicts with Israel and the US cannot be separated as Israel's existence is contingent on American support, saying "Every massacre committed by the enemy is an American massacre, and every aggression of this enemy is American aggression."

Concerning the worsening economic crisis in Lebanon, Nasrallah blamed the US, saying American policy is the "main reason" for the crisis, as "the Americans want to besiege, punish and prevent any aid that comes to Lebanon." 

While Nasrallah admitted that incorrect government policies were also "among the causes" of the economic crisis, he stressed that the US is the "main cause."

Nasrallah added that the goal of the American blockade is to "provoke" the people of Lebanon against Hezbollah and to keep Hezbollah busy in order to prevent it from supporting Palestinians.

On Sunday night, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz offered humanitarian aid to Lebanon, saying "as an Israeli, as a Jew and as a human being, my heart aches seeing the images of people going hungry on the streets of Lebanon."

Lebanon is suffering from a worsening economic crisis, with violence and protests breaking out in cities around the country as basic services collapse. Electricity outages and gas shortages are commonplace.

More than half of Lebanon’s population is living in poverty, and its financial crisis is likely to rank in the top 10, and possibly even the top three, most severe crises in the world since the mid-1800s, according to the World Bank.

Nasrallah has said in recent speeches that the country's gasoline crisis could be addressed "within a few days" if it would just accept Iranian oil shipments, which are under sanctions by international law.

Hezbollah will eventually negotiate directly with Tehran and import Iranian oil through the Port of Beirut if the Lebanese government does not begin “bearing its responsibility,” Nasrallah said at the time.

During the speech, which focused largely on pro-Iranian media capabilities, Nasrallah also claimed that Israelis trust Palestinian and pro-Iranian media more than they trust their own leaders and media.

Nasrallah stressed that the media of the "Axis of Resistance" must be developed just like its military capabilities, adding that the "resounding victory" that the media contributed to the "victory" Palestinian terrorist groups claimed during Operation Guardian of the Walls.

The Hezbollah leader additionally claimed that "everyone" recognized the "victory" of the Palestinians during the operation, despite "some media in the Gulf" denying it. "While the enemy fails to achieve victory, Arab media come to make an imaginary victory for him from the remains of children," said Nasrallah.

Nasrallah also referenced the recent blocking of a number of pro-Iranian media sites by the US, saying that this was "proof" of the strength of the resistance media "because of its influence."

The militant leader stressed the importance of using social media, stating that while "the enemy can take down satellite channels, it is not possible to stop social networking sites, so we must take advantage of them."

"We know the enemy's strengths, recognize them, and work on ways to confront and weaken them," said Nasrallah. The Hezbollah leader claimed that one of the most important strengths of the axis' media is "honesty in conveying news and facts, adding that the militant groups' media did not rely on "illusions and lies" in their "psychological war."

Referring to Palestinian issues, Nasrallah stated that Palestinian militant groups promised "liberation" and to get prisoners released, and fulfilled their promise. It is unclear which liberation Nasrallah was referring to. Additionally, a prisoner swap agreement has not yet been reached.

"When in the axis of resistance we talk about the liberation of Palestine, we are not talking about dreams or fantasies. The battle of the Sword of Jerusalem (the name the Palestinians gave to Operation Guardian of the Walls) has made Jerusalem closer than ever," said Nasrallah. "We do not exaggerate our goals, and this is one of the most important elements of the resistance force."

In recent speeches, Nasrallah has warned that any “violation” of Jerusalem would result in a regional war in which pro-Iranian groups from multiple countries could take part.

Nasrallah also addressed recent reports in Lebanese media about the defendants in the investigation of last year's Beirut port explosion, questioning whether the investigation was "real judicial action" or "political targeting." A large explosion targeted the Beirut offices of a lawyer involved in the case last week.

Dozens were killed and thousands were injured in the massive blast which shook Beirut last August. While the investigation into the explosion has made little headway amid a system plagued by corruption, Lebanese Judge Tarek Bitar recently moved to lift the immunity of a number of high ranking officials in order to question them as suspects in the case.

“Justice is still distant and the truth is still concealed,” said Nasrallah concerning the investigation. Hezbollah has been accused of being responsible for the blast, as it has strong control over Lebanon’s ports.