What to forget Nakba or antisemitism?

May 15, marks the 73rd anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe). During the Nakba between 750,000 and 1,000,000 Palestinians were driven out of their homes and ethnically cleansed at the hands of Zionist militia and the Israeli army to force the creation of the state of Israel. 

This year's commemoration took place against the backdrop of renewed Israeli aggression and bloodshed against Palestinians. The Nakba did not end in 1948 and continues to this day with Israel relentlessly pursuing the dispossession of the Palestinian people. 

Here are 10 facts the world needs to know about the Palestinian Nakba: 

1- Between 1947 and 1949 Israel and pre-state Zionist militia forced approximately 750,000 to 1,000,000 Palestinians into exile making them refugees. 

2 – At present, there are around 8 million Palestine refugees in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and neighboring Arab countries such as Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria. They are denied their UN-sanctioned right to return to their homes, lands and other property by Israel.

3 - The Nakba was a deliberate and systematic act carried out in order to create a Jewish majority state in historic Palestine, which was overwhelmingly indigenous Palestinian Arab prior to 1948.

4 - Contrary to Zionist mythology, pre-state Zionist militia begun its ethnic cleansing of Palestinian towns and villages months before the creation of the State of Israel. The massacre and depopulation of the Palestinian village of Deir Yasin took place in 9th April 1948. 

5 - Approximately 150,000 Palestinians remained inside what became Israel's borders in 1948, many of them internally displaced. They were granted Israeli citizenship but to this day live as second-class citizens in their own homeland, subjected to dozens of laws that discriminate against them because they are not Jewish.

6 - Israeli forces systematically destroyed about 530 Palestinian towns and villages to prevent refugees from returning. Many homes that remained standing were repopulated with its Israeli Jewish population. 

7 - The Jewish National Fund (JNF) acquired approximately 78 percent of its land holdings from the state between 1949 and 1953, much of it the land of Palestinian refugees that the state confiscated as “absentee property.” The JNF holds this land stolen as “the perpetual property of the Jewish People,” which means Palestinians are unable to get it back

8 - The Nakba did not end in 1948 and continues to this day, in the form of Israel’s ongoing theft of Palestinian land for settlements and for Jewish communities inside Israel, its destruction of Palestinian homes and agricultural land, revocation of residency rights, deportations, demographic engineering, periodic brutal military assaults, and forced displacement.

9 - Many residents of Sheikh Jarrah were ethnically cleansed from their homes during the Nakba. They currently face becoming refugees for the second or third time. What is happening now in Sheikh Jarrah and Jerusalem is a prime example of the Nakba in action. It repeats itself in the Jordan Valley, in the Naqab and across the territory under Israeli control. Indigenous Palestinians are being forced from their homes by state sponsored violence at the hands of Israeli soldiers, Israeli police, and armed Israeli citizens.

10 - Israel has a law that prohibits Palestinians who are second-class citizens of the state from commemorating the Nakba on May 15. This does not stop Palestinians from remembering. Share the stories of the Nakba from Palestinians and join BDS campaigns, the most effective way to support our struggle to achieve our internationally recognized rights, including the Right of Return for refugees.

Israel resisting reopening of the US consulate for Palestinians in Jerusalem

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed US Secretary of State Antony Blinken that his country opposes reopening of a US consulate for Palestinians in sovereign Israel. His announcement came hours before the US went public with its plan to do so in Jerusalem.

Blinken did not specify where in Jerusalem the new consulate would be. Many other countries have consulates or embassies to the Palestinians in east Jerusalem, which is part of Israel under Israeli law but not recognized by most countries, or in Ramallah.

The Trump administration then merged the US consulate for Palestinians, on Jerusalem’s Agron Street, into the US Embassy to Israel in West Jerusalem in March 2019; the move was mostly symbolic as most consulate workers continued doing the work they did before, but under the title of “Palestinian Affairs Unit.”

Blinken said in a press conference that he is not sure what the time frame will be on reopening the consulate.

“I can tell you that it’s, I think, important to have that platform to be able to more effectively engage not just the Palestinian Authority, but Palestinians from different walks of life, the NGO community, the business community, and others. And so we look forward to doing that,” he stated.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said soon after that reopening the consulate “is an important step in our view, in terms of continuing to rebuild the relationship with the Palestinian leaders that was cut off for several years because of the closure of the consulate, because UNRWA funding was cut off in 2018, and there really wasn’t a method for engaging with Palestinian leaders and others.”

Israeli Ambassador to the US and UN Gilad Erdan said that it is the US’s prerogative to reopen the consulate, but that Israel “indeed expressed clear opposition to reestablishing the consulate on Jerusalem’s municipal territory.”

“It can be in Abu Dis [or] Ramallah,” Erdan told KAN. “The fact that the Americans may have a security concern from opening a consulate for their workers in these places only shows what we’re talking about.”

Erdan also pointed out that opening the PA embassy in Jerusalem contradicts American policy recognizing the city as Israel’s capital, as former US president Donald Trump did in 2018 and Biden said he would not reverse. Still, Erdan said, “we can disagree with the current government and not every disagreement has to become a crisis.

Creation of a fact-finding mission to investigate Israeli actions against Palestinians

Pakistan and the Palestinian Authority (PA) have submitted a resolution on the creation of a fact-finding mission that will be voted on Thursday when the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) holds a special session on the matter in Geneva.

The United Nations Human Rights Council is expected to establish a commission of inquiry into Israeli actions against Palestinians doing the period leading up to and including the 11-day Gaza war that ended on May 21.

In particular, the committee would investigate Israeli activity in Gaza and Jerusalem as well as the ethnic riots that broke out in mixed cities within sovereign Israel.

"The commission would be authorized to make recommendations, in particular on accountability measures, all with a view to avoiding and ending impunity and ensuring legal accountability, including individual criminal and command responsibility, for such violations, and justice for victims," the Resolution states. 

It would explore the "alleged violations of international humanitarian law and all alleged violations and abuses of international human rights law leading up to and since 13 April 2021, and all underlying root causes of recurrent tensions, instability and protraction of conflict, including systematic discrimination and repression based on national, ethnic, racial or religious identity."

Israel's mission to the UN in Geneva responded immediately, noting the absence of Hamas's firing of rockets against Israeli cities and towns.

"No mention of Hamas. No mention of 4300+ rockets," it stated, adding, "we call on Member States to speak up and oppose this resolution."

Thursday's special session will be the 30th one that the UNHRC has held since its inception in 2006, out of which nine focused on Israel. No other country has been the subject of so many special sessions.

There have been at least five fact-finding missions into Israeli military actions in the past, including one on the Hamas-led "Great March of Return" as well as on past Gaza wars.  

Iran presidential lineup

The Iranian Interior Ministry finally issued the much-awaited list of candidates who were found eligible to run for president, ending a wave of rumors and speculations over the potential array of candidates in the June presidential election. 

The Ministry said in a statement that it received the list of candidates whose qualifications were confirmed by the Guardian Council. The list included a number of prominent figures such as Saeed Jalili, Seyed Ebrahim Raisi, Alireza Zakani, Seyed Amir Hossein Qazizadeh Hashemi, Mohsen Mehralizadeh, Mohsen Rezaei, and Abdolnaser Hemmati.

These candidates are now allowed to start election campaigns and promote themselves in the eyes of millions of voters across the country. 

The list of candidates came as a surprise to many observers as it did not include some prominent figures that have been widely thought to be qualified for the 13th presidential election of the Islamic Republic. Former Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani, First-Vice President Es’haq Jahangiri, and Saeed Mohammad, the former Chief of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps’ engineering conglomerate Khatam al-Anbiya, were among the disqualified candidates. 

According to Fars News, the election vetting body disqualified at least 18 candidates who are principlist or close to the principlist faction. It also rejected 14 candidates who are reformists or close to the reformist faction. 

This was a clear indication that the Guardian Council refused to vet candidates on the basis of their political affiliation. In fact, the council set a clear example of impartiality and abiding by law by disqualifying Larijani, who currently serves as an advisor to the Leader on international affairs. 

Larijani was widely promoted by moderate and reformist political circles as a candidate whose ties to the establishment enable him to earn qualification from the council and turn the tide in favor of reformists and their moderate allies in the government of Hassan Rouhani. 

But the Guardian Council made it clear that its vetting process is by no means subject to political or “expediency” considerations. Instead, it would examine the candidates in strict accordance with the law. 

In fact, the disqualification of Larijani indicated that the council never discriminates against candidates from different political and social backgrounds. At the end of the day, Larijani has held high-level posts in the Islamic Republic for years and now is currently serving as an advisor to the Leader. This is another indication that the Guardian Council can discharge its legal duties even when it comes to disqualifying high-level figures.

This brings us to the issue of the fluidity of the vetting process, which is more subject to present-day considerations than to past experiences. In some cases, the Guardian Council confirms individuals who have been disqualified in the past and vice versa. This does not mean that council’s criteria for screening are changing from time to time. The standards and criteria of the Guardian Council are subject to the law as a yardstick for who will be qualified or disqualified.

Regardless of the standards, the council performs its duty in legal but quiet ways. Usually, the oversight body does not publicly reveal the reasons behind its decisions regarding the candidates. And this has paved the way for some political factions to unfairly blame it for disqualifying certain candidates. Despite these criticisms, the council continues to protect the confidentiality of the vetting process. This has much to do with protecting the privacy of candidates.  

If the council reveals the reasons behind the disqualifications, the disqualified candidates’ reputation may be damaged; at the end of the day, the vetting process also includes security details about the candidates. That’s why the Guardian Council continues to vet candidates in a legal way while protecting the candidates’ reputation from being undermined by a formal process that is designed to increase social and political cohesion.
 

Love and hate relation between Netanyahu and Hamas

The recent 11-day encounter between Israel and Hamas clearly demonstrates that Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu hates Hamas the most. Netanyahu’s retaliation against Hamas was based on one fact ‘people of Gaza refuses to become subservient to Israel’s dictate, while people living areas under the control of Palestinian Authority and West bank don’t behave in the similar manner’.

This point gets credibility because elections in PA administered area were postponed on the fears that Hamas has also developed its strong clout there. It may also be said that Israel wanted to destroy Hamas infrastructure, which could only be done by dragging it into an encounter, paving way for the most precise air attacks, including blowing up of tunnels and the tower housing Hamas intelligence office.

The media outlets towing Israeli policy are saying: 1) Hamas has suffered a devastating blow. Its military assets, administration infrastructure and underground system of tunnels have been destroyed, 2) already difficult humanitarian conditions of two million Palestinians living in Gaza has become even worse, 3) the citizens are incapable of paying the high price of Hamas’s aggressive ideology and 4) a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on two-state solution is not yet achievable.

Hamas is also being portrayed as ‘bad boy’ adamant at keeping its control over Gaza and pursuing the role of leading the Palestinian national movement and of taking over the PLO.

It may sound a bit shocking, but it is reality that Israelis are sick and tired of Netanyahu’s policy of maintaining Hamas’s control in Gaza. The money, supplied to Hamas by Qatar with the support of Netanyahu, enabled the huge military build-up that Israel is now trying to destroy.

It is not only Israelis, several Arab countries, who don’t like Hamas want to see the end of its regime in Gaza.

With the support of the international community and under the auspices of the Arab League, it is being proposed to establish a civilian, non-partisan Palestinian administration in Gaza. The new order in the Gaza will be enshrined in a new UN Security Council resolution and resolution from the Arab League.

If such a non-partisan administration is established, Qatar will no longer be dominantly involved in Gaza. Other Gulf countries will replace it. The external security of the Gaza could be under the responsibility of Egypt. Domestic security would be under a new police agency, reporting to the civil administration, not to Hamas.

Israel expresses its readiness to assist in the activities of the new Gaza administration, including those involving trade, labor, energy and activity

This alternative path will promise to offer people living in Gaza a safer and better future. The citizens of Israel living in the South would gain the calm and security they deserve after thousands of rockets hitting them for more than two decades.

Whatever the next step is to improve the Gaza situation, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not be resolved. The International quartet, together with the Arab quartet will encourage the parties to resume negotiations for a permanent status agreement based on two states, which may not be achieved in near future.

Copper price on the rise

Copper prices rose on Monday as a softer USD spurred modest purchases, but gains were capped by concerns over price curbs on industrial metals in top consumer China. Benchmark copper on the London Metal Exchange (LME) was up 0.3% at US$9,916 a ton at 1014 GMT.

However, prices of the metal used widely in the power and construction industries are down 8% since touching a record high of US$10,747.50 a ton earlier this month.

“The USD is giving some support to copper, but overall the mood is negative,” one metals trader said. “Still, the market did need a breather and consolidation.”

China’s market regulators warned industrial metal companies to maintain “normal market order” during talks on the significant gains in metals prices this year.

China’s government also said last week that it would manage “unreasonable” price increases for commodities such as copper, coal, steel and iron ore.

Some concern about supplies on the LME market has narrowed the discount for cash copper over the three-month contract to about US$14 a ton from US$28 last week.

Supporting copper is political uncertainty in Peru and top producer Chile. An overhaul of Chile’s market-orientated constitution is under way and the country is debating whether to increase royalties on miners.

Peru, the No. 2 producer, is heading for a polarized June presidential election. Leading in the polls is a little-known socialist who wants to redistribute mining wealth.

A likely surge in reviewable energy demand, particularly windmills is set to drive a surge in copper demand. It is estimated that the quantity of copper required per wind turbine is staggering at 63,000 pounds.

A week ago, price of the basic metal surged to a record high because of supply chain disruptions. By the end of the week it had cooled off on efforts by China to rein in the commodity market rally.

Now copper price is on the way up again, and this is likely to be a steady trend. The reason for this is renewable energy—and more specifically wind energy. Offshore wind turbines require 8 tons of copper for every megawatt of generation capacity. According to data from the International Energy Agency, “An average turbine of 3.6MW will contain close to 29 tons of copper.”

This upward trend in demand for copper will only intensify in the coming years as the world expands its renewable power generation capacity. It is likely to be supported by the constant threat of a supply disruption like the one in Chile that spurred the latest reversal in copper’s fortunes.

Earlier, copper price rebounded by concerns of supply disruptions in Chile and signs that Chinese demand is picking up.

Workers at BHP Group’s remote operations center in Santiago rejected the company’s final wage offer, with almost 97% of the union’s members opting to strike. Under Chilean labor rules, BHP now has the right to call for five days of government mediation. Meanwhile, demand in top user China is recovering after prices retreated, Jinrui Futures Co. said in a note, pointing to a spike in the domestic spot premium.

Bets on tight supplies and rising use have fueled a year-long rally in copper, which touched an all-time high before gains ebbed. The risk of a strike poses an added threat to output from the top copper-mining country, which already faces a potential giant tax hike. A proposal to tax Chilean copper sales at rates of as high as 75% is rippling all the way to Peru, where the leading presidential candidate wants to impose a similar measure.

“LME metals have started the new week on a firmer footing amid a slew of news stories,” Ed Meir, an analyst at ED&F Man Capital Markets, said in a note. “We are watching copper in particular; we learned that a union representing workers at BHP’s Escondida and Spence mines rejected an offer on a future contract, raising the risk of a strike at these sizable facilities.”

Israelis march in Tel Aviv for peace and coexistence

Thousands of Israelis marched in Tel Aviv on Saturday evening in a show of support for peace and coexistence between Jews and Arabs after two weeks of intense violent riots across the country. 

Protesters also voiced support for the recent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that came into effect early Friday, called on the government to take immediate action to end Israeli occupation in the West Bank and to reach peace with the Palestinians.   

The mass march was organized by the "Standing Together" and "Breaking the Silence" movements. It left Rabin Square in Tel Aviv and made its way toward Habima Square.

Speakers included well-known Israeli novelist and left-wing activist David Grossman, author ʻAwdah Bishārāt, Joint List leader Ayman Odeh and MK Tamar Zandberg (Meretz).

"I hear politicians and security officials speak about another round of fighting in a few months or years, while being blind to the 7 million Palestinians living between the [Jordan] river and the [Mediterranean] sea," Odeh said. "There are two peoples living here and both deserve the right for self-determination." 

"These past few days have shown us how life in this country can look like - a nightmare," Zandberg added. "We don't want to start waiting for the next war, but to change direction toward peace - to live together in true partnership."

A similar protest took place last Saturday at Habima Square, which was one of several protests attended by Jews and Arabs across the country that called for peace and for coexistence amid the nationwide riots and the military operation in Gaza.

Jews and Arabs gathered daily during Operation Guardians of the Walls on bridges and intersections along the country and protested against the ongoing violence.

Also on Saturday, hundreds gathered outside the Prime Minister's Residence in Jerusalem, calling on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign and blaming him for the escalation in Gaza and claiming that he deliberately extended the operation for no reason but personal interest.

Earlier Saturday, about 200 people marched along the streets of the mixed city of Jaffa, voicing support for coexistence between Arabs and Jews while visiting small local businesses.

 

What could be likely impact of Gaza crisis on South Asia?

While some analysts may say South Asia is not a party to the Gaza conflict, the region is still vulnerable to its potentially destabilizing effects. It poses security risks within the region, including violent protests and terrorist attacks.

It is worth exploring what the crisis means for South Asia, which does not have common border with the Middle East. India and Nepal have long-standing links to Israel and Bhutan normalized ties in December 2020. As against this Pakistan fully support the Palestinian cause.

India has strengthened its ties with Israel significantly. Relations between the two countries have grown stronger under Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He became the first sitting Indian prime minister to visit Israel. India has supported the Palestinian cause in the past. In 2018, Modi became the first Indian prime minister to visit the Palestinian territories too.

India’s ambassador to the United Nations issued a bit confusing statement on the conflict. He condemned Palestinian violence and described Israel’s use of force as retaliatory, but in the same breath affirmed India’s strong support for the Palestinian cause and two-state solution.

As against this, Pakistan has put to rest all lingering speculation that it could be one of the next countries normalizing ties with Israel. Pakistan made it clear that it will only recognize Israel when a Palestinian state is established.

Some analysts say the current conflict also poses security risks for South Asia. It could spark pro-Palestinian protests that could lead to violence. They also fear that some non-state actors or miscreants hiding in Afghanistan may enter Kashmir and try to put the valley inferno.

Washington must actively manage Israel-Palestine conflict it can’t end

The administration of US President Joe Biden entered office expecting to take a less proactive approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than many of its predecessors. Four days into the recent war between Israel and Hamas this approach was evident. 

Biden responded to a question,“I have spoken to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel had a right to defend itself, and that he hoped the fighting would be over sooner rather than later.”

The conflict requires management, because conditions simply do not exist for its resolution. Sadly, Biden administration has not yet put an ambassador in Israel (even an interim one) or a consul general in Jerusalem to deal with the Palestinians. Instead, management was left to one poorly staffed, midlevel official in the State Department. The Biden administration deserves credit for intervening at a higher level to get Netanyahu to stop the evictions, marches, and Israeli police violence in East Jerusalem.

Before the outbreak of this latest conflict, there was hope that a new government would be formed in Israel that would put an end to Netanyahu’s rule. Yair Lapid (the head of the Yesh Atid party) and Naftali Bennett (the head of the Yamina party) were about to cobble together a left-center-right coalition that would depend on the support of Arab parties to scrape together a majority vote of confidence.

Then a shocking spate of mob violence broke out between Jews and Arabs, spreading from Jerusalem to other Israeli cities. This severely complicated the task of building a government. Even if a unity government emerges, its first prime minister will be Naftali Bennett. Among Israel’s leaders, he is the most dedicated opponent of an independent Palestinian state and the most dedicated proponent of annexing the West Bank.

In the coming days, once the IDF has completed its destruction of Hamas’s infrastructure and eliminated as many of the leaders of its armed wing as it can find, Netanyahu will likely be willing, too. Usually cautious, he will not want to go into a fifth election with a war raging. Already, he is being blamed for the disruption to Israeli life. 

The world has seen Israel-Hamas wars before—the last one was in 2014. This time it is alleged that Hamas, with the assistance Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad, fired rockets indiscriminately. Israel retaliated disproportionately. The United States supports Israel's right to defend itself. Europe wags its finger at Israel. Hamas eventually decides it has made its point. Qatar and Egypt mediate a cease-fire based on the usual “quiet for quiet” deal. Both sides bury their dead, clear the rubble, and go back to business as usual while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hamas’s Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades prepare for the next round.

The Biden administration’s approach suggests that Washington will be comfortable with another ceasefire, as it has other priorities. These include pandemic, economic recovery, climate change, China’s rise and Iran’s nuclear ambitions, to mention a few. The president’s deference to Netanyahu’s timetable is indicative of this change in approach, in which the parties are left to deal with the conflict.

Every crisis creates an opportunity. Could the circumstances this time create an opportunity for Washington to step up its engagement? Could the United States progress toward its avowed goal of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The answer, unfortunately, is no. The status quo actually suits both sides quite well and neither has an interest in changing it. Hamas was upset by the cancellation of Palestinian elections, in which it hoped to extend its influence to the West Bank. In exchange for that it took advantage of a confluence of Jewish-Arab confrontations in East Jerusalem to extend its influence there. It fired rockets toward Jerusalem. That in turn enraged Netanyahu, who was content to have Hamas rule in Gaza but not in the West Bank, and certainly not in East Jerusalem.

Hamas hopes to enhance its standing among Palestinians; Israel hopes to reestablish its deterrence against Hamas’s attacks on its citizens. Neither side is interested in having the United States broker a two-state solution. Hamas is dedicated to a one-state solution in which Israel does not exist; Netanyahu is committed to a three-state solution in which Hamas rules in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority presides over West Bank enclaves.

The third party to this conflict—Abu Mazen—would love to see the United States re-engage, because that would help make him relevant again. But American negotiators have had enough experience with Abu Mazen and believe that he is in no position to accept the compromises necessary to achieve a two-state solution. He fears, he will be denounced as a traitor by Hamas for any concession he makes to Israel, Abu Mazen intends to go into the history books as the leader who refused to compromise Palestinian rights.

Resolution to block arms sale to Israel won’t pass the Senate

An effort by Sen. Bernie Sanders to block a US$735 million arms sale to Israel appears doomed in the Senate. His effort is largely symbolic, and short-lived, as he faces multiple headaches that essentially guarantee his resolution won’t pass the Senate. 

Midnight Friday is the end of the 15 days for this particular commercial sale to Israel, and the export license can be issued after that. It is usually done so pretty much automatically when time expires.

“Our goal must be to bring, to do everything possible, under very, very difficult circumstances to bring the Israelis and the Palestinians together,” Sanders said. “That is the best way we fight terrorism, not just give support to Israel. We need an even handed approach.”

Typically when lawmakers try to prevent an arms sale — something Congress has never accomplished through a joint resolution — they are able to force a vote, with passage requiring only a simple majority in the Senate by using the Arms Export Control Act to bypass the 60-vote filibuster.

That means Sanders would need 51 votes, or 50 votes and Vice President Harris to vote against the administration’s arms sale.

With deep Democratic divisions over what tactics the administration should deploy against Israel, a long-time ally that typically enjoys bipartisan support, Sanders does not appear to have a path to the votes he needs.

Among those opposing the resolution is Sen. Bob Menendez, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. “I wouldn't be supporting it,” Menendez said.

Sen. Ben Cardin also said he isn’t on board, adding that he doesn’t think there are 50 votes in the Senate to try to block the sale. “I’m not supportive of his resolution,” Cardin said. “I have confidence that the Biden administration is handling it properly.”

Sen. Chris Murphy, who has used the same provision of the Arms Export Control Act to try to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia — said he was waiting to get briefed before taking a position on the sale to Israel.

Sen. Tim Kaine, a member of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, declined to take a position on Sanders’s resolution but signaled that he trusted the Biden administration’s approach. “The sale is going to take place a year from now ... I hope they are talking to them about the proposed use of these weapons,” Kaine said.

While a growing number of Democrats, including leadership in both chambers, publicly backed efforts for a cease-fire, calling off the arms sale didn’t garner nearly as much support.

Even Sen. Rand Paul, a libertarian-minded Republican who typically supports blocking arms sales, said he wouldn’t back the resolution. "I have been opposed in the past to arms sales to people who I think are acting in a way that's sort of an undemocratic way, a tyrannical way," Paul said. "I think what I see Israel doing is acting in self-defense."

Most arms sales are subject to a 30-day congressional review period during which lawmakers can attempt to block the deal if they want. But some close allies, including Israel, are afforded a 15-day review period, which runs out this week.

But a disagreement has cropped up over when the review window expires and, once it does, what it means for Sanders’s ability to force a vote. “I think procedurally he may be out of time,” Menendez said. “But I’m not sure, we’ll see what the parliamentarian has to say.”

The Senate aide and Cardin both said they expected that once the review window expires, Sanders’s resolution loses its privileged status that allows him to force a quick vote.

Under the fast-track procedures, Sanders still needs to let the resolution sit in the Foreign Relations Committee for 10 calendar days before he can try to bring it to the Senate floor. And the House is out of town until mid-June, well past the congressional review period.

What after ceasefire?

Israel and Hamas finally agreed to a ceasefire on Thursday, ending a bruising 11-day war that caused widespread destruction in the Gaza Strip and brought life in much of Israel to a standstill. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted the Egyptian proposal and Hamas was quick to follow the suit.

In a statement, Netanyahu’s office said the security cabinet unanimously approved the proposal after recommendations from the military chief of staff and other top defence officials. The statement boasted of significant achievements in the operation, some of which are unprecedented.

The agreement would close the heaviest round of fighting between the bitter enemies since a 50-day war in 2014, and once again there was no clear winner. Israel inflicted heavy damage on Hamas but was unable to prevent the rocket fire that has disrupted life for millions of Israelis for more than a decade.

The fighting began on May 10, when Hamas fighters in Gaza fired long-range rockets toward Jerusalem after days of clashes between Palestinian protesters and Israeli police at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound.

Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes targeting what it said was Hamas’ military infrastructure. Hamas fired over 4,000 rockets at Israeli cities, with hundreds falling short and most of the rest intercepted.

The OIC statement came after a virtual meeting in which Saudi Arabia condemned the violation of the sanctity of Muslim holy sites and evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud urged the global community to end the escalation in violence and revive peace negotiations based on a two-state solution.

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates called for a ceasefire. "De-escalation and the highest degree of restraint are important to avoid dragging the region to new levels of instability," said UAE Minister of State for International Cooperation Reem al-Hashimy.

“The massacre of Palestinian children follows the purported normalization,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said. “This criminal and genocidal regime has once again proven that friendly gestures only aggravate its atrocities.” Zarif accused Israel of “genocide and crimes against humanity”.

"Each time Israel hears a foreign leader speak of its right to defend itself it is further emboldened to continue murdering entire families in their sleep," Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki told the Security Council.

The OIC video conference meeting attracted criticism on countries like Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates, which reached normalization deals last year to recognize Israel. Supporters of the Palestinians criticized the countries for recognizing Israel before the formation of an independent Palestinian state.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu joined Zarif in criticizing the normalization. Cavusoglu called for an international protection mechanism for Palestinian civilians and told the OIC that Israel should be held accountable for war crimes and that the International Criminal Court should play a role.

The United States told the United Nations Security Council that it has made clear to Israel, the Palestinians and others that it is ready to offer support should the parties seek a ceasefire to end the worsening violence by Israel in Gaza.

"The United States has been working tirelessly through diplomatic channels to try to bring an end to this conflict," US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the 15-member council. "Because we believe Israelis and Palestinians equally have a right to live in safety and security."

"We call upon the US to shoulder its responsibilities, take a just position, and together with most of the international community support the Security Council in easing the situation," said Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who chaired Sunday's meeting because China is president for May.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the United Nations is "actively engaging all sides toward an immediate ceasefire" and called on them "to allow mediation efforts to intensify and succeed".

Way Forward

These quotes clearly indicate that the root cause of the problem is known to all and they are also aware of the solution. Following two states theory can help in establishing sustainable peace in the region. There is a need to convert ‘Gaza the world’s largest open air prison’ into home for Palestinians. United States and other world powers should support Palestine Authority (PA) to initiate economic activities. On top of all Israel must immediately stop eviction of Palestinians from Jerusalem and construction of settlements on occupied land.

Israel deceiving media

Lately, it has been observed that Israel is spreading disinformation at massive sale. The most naked proof of this campaign is this picture placed by The Jerusalem Post. Reportedly the bus was hit by an anti-tank missile. It is evident: 1) it is picture of a bus standing in some junk yard and 2) bus was not hit by anti-tank missile.

According to the The Jerusalem Post, Hamas's Izzadin Al-Qassam Brigades targeted a bus that had been carrying Israeli soldiers north of the Gaza Strip with an anti-tank missile and subsequently launched a barrage of mortar shells towards the site where the bus allegedly was targeted on Thursday morning. The IDF reported that the bus was empty and one soldier was slightly injured in the incident.

The driver of the bus told KAN news about the attack, saying "I dropped off the soldiers, turned around and then there was the hit. The whole vehicle shook, it was a miracle. About 30 soldiers got off a few seconds before and dispersed. I will continue to drive for soldiers. Thank God no one was hurt - the cabin is not protected, everything is plastic."

After the attack, residents of communities within four kilometers of the Gaza border were ordered to stay in their homes near shelters and residents of Netiv Ha'Asara were ordered to actually stay in shelters until further notice.

Time to dump Netanyahu

This morning, I was saddened as well perturbed after reading the details of conversation between the US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

President Biden told Netanyahu, he expects Israel to move towards a ceasefire with Hamas, but Netanyahu said Operation Guardian of the Walls will continue until Israeli citizens are secure.

Earlier, Netanyahu had said Israel does not have a set time by which it seeks to finish Operation Guardian of the Walls. The possible responses to Hamas are to either conquer Gaza or to deter them, he added.

In my opinion only Netanyahu can be held responsible for the present turmoil in the region. He went against the concept of ‘Two States’ and indulged in eviction of Palestinians from Jerusalem. He also continued construction of new settlements on ‘occupied land’.

Under the ‘Abraham Accords’, he was given an opportunity to normalize relations with Muslim countries, but he created a mess rather than building confidence. Now there is pressure on Muslim countries, which normalized relations, to bid farewell to these accords.

On can understand his haste, he was losing popularity in Israel. Four elections may have prolonged his rule, but criminal proceedings and ICC initiation of ‘war crimes’ proceedings shattered his dreams.

Instead of resolving the crisis with cool head, he opted for initiating war against Hamas or ‘conquering’ Gaza. This also backed fired because now followers of Judaism emerge his biggest opponent.   

Look at this picture, be it the residents of Israel or Gaza, they should not be exposed to this kind of torture. To establish sustainable peace in both the areas, the philosophy of ‘eliminating each other’ has to be given up. The prudent approach is, let both the people live in their own areas they way they wish.

It is also to remind that Netanyahu’s term has ended on 5th May 2021 and his stay in the office is ‘illegal’. He must immediately seek ‘vote of confidence’ or President of Israel must ask others to form a new government immediately.

To conclude, Netanyahu has ruled Israel for considerably long time and he must take an exit now. His effort to remain in power by promoting war with Hamas is killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people, both Jews and Muslims.